HX 
15 
G34 
v.l 


APPEAL   SOCIALIST   CLASSICS 

EDITED  BY  W.  J.  GHENT 


No.l 

e  Elements  of  Socialism 


single  Pamphlets,  25  Cents 
The  Set  of  12,  $2.00 


APPEAL    SOCIALIST    CLASSICS 

EDITED  BY  W.  J.  GHENT 


No.l 

The  Elements  of  Socialism 


Copyright,  1916,  by  Appeal  to  Reason 


APPEAL  TO   REASON 
Girard,  Kansas 


THE  SERIES 


The  pamphlets  in  this  series  are  compoBed,  in  the  main,  of 
selections  from  the  published  work  of  Socialist  writers,  mostly 
of  the  present  day.  In  some  of  them,  particularly  "Socialist 
Documents"  and  "Socialism  and  Government,"  the  writings  used 
are  mainly  of  collective,  rather  than  individual  authorship; 
while  the  Historical  Sketch  is  the  composition  of  the  editor. 

To  the  selections  given,  the  editor  has  added  explanatory 
and  connecting  paragraphs,  welding  the  fragments  into  a  co- 
herent whole.  The  aim  is  the  massing  together  in  concise  and 
systematic  form,  of  what  has  been  most  clearly  and  pertinently 
said,  either  by  individual  Socialist  writers  or  by  committees 
speaking  for  the  party  as  a  whole,  on  all  of  the  main  phases  of 
Socialism. 

In  their  finished  form  they  might,  with  some  appropriate- 
ness, be  termed  mosaics:  each  pamphlet  is  an  arrangement  cf 
parts  from  many  sources  according  to  a  unitary  design.  Most  of 
the  separate  pieces  are,  however,  in  the  beet  sense  classics: 
they  are  expressions  of  Socialist  thought  which,  by  general  ap- 
proval, have  won  authoritative  rank.  A  classic,  according 
to  James  Russell  Lowell,  is  of  itself  "something  neither  ancient 
nor  modern";  even  the  most  recent  writing  may  be  considered 
classic  if,  for  the  mood  it  depicts  or  the  thought  it  franses,  it 
unites  matter  and  style  into  an  expression  of  approved  merit. 

For  the  choice  of  selections  the  editor  is  alone  responsible. 
Doubtless  for  some  of  the  subjects  treated  another  editor 
would  have  chosen  differently.  The  difficulty  indeed  has  been 
in  deciding  what  to  omit;  for  the  mass  of  Socialist  literature 
contains  much  that  may  be  rightly  called  classic  which  ob- 
viously could  not  have  been  included  in  these  brief  volumes. 

The  pamphlets  in  the  series  are  as  follows: 

1.  The  Elements  of  Socialism. 

2.  The  Science  of  Socialism. 

3.  Socialism:   A  Historical  Sketch. 

4.  Socialist  Documents. 

5.  Socialism  and  Government. 

6.  Questions  and  Answers 

7.  Socialism  and  Organized  Labor. 

8.  Socialism  and  the  Farmer. 

9.  Socialism  and  Social  Reform. 

10.  The  Tactics  of  Sociausm. 

11.  The  Socialist  Appeal. 

12.  Socialism  in  Verse. 


MX 


CONTENTS 

number  and  title  page 

Preface    4 

I.    What  Socialism  Is § 

II.    A  Passion  for  Industrial  Equality 6 

The  Link  with  the  Past € 

The  Moral  Genesis  of  Socialism 7 

The  Transition  from  Utopia  to  Science S 

III.    A  Theory  of  Social  Evolution it 

The  Economic  Interpretation  of  History It 

The  Class  Struggle   12 

Wage-Earner  vs.  Capitalist   18 

The  Age  of  Machinery  15 

The  Trust    19 

The  Socialist  Indictment  of  Capitalism % 

The  Outcome 32 

IV.    A  System  of  Political  Economy 35 

Capitalism    36 

Capital    S€ 

The  Commodity  and  Its  Value 37 

Labor  and  Labor-Power  3S 

Labor  the  Source  of  Value 38 

Value  and  Price  39 

Surplus  Value  40 

V.    An  Organized  International  Movement 42 

VI.    A  Social  Ideal 44 

Socialism  and  the  State 44 

Outlines  of  the  Socialist  State 46 

3 


PREFACE 

in  this  pamphlet  Socialism  is  defined  in  its  various 
aspects — as  a  passion  for,  and  effort  toward,  industrial 
equality;  a  theory  of  social  evolution,  a  system  of  political 
economy,  an  organized  international  movement  and  a  social 
ideal.  With  each  definition  is  given  one  or  more  selections 
from  some  authoritative  Socialist  writer,  illustrating  the 
matter  defined.  These  selections  are  mainly  chosen  for  their 
conciseness  and  simplicity  of  style. 

The  word  ''authoritative"  is  used,  of  course,  in  a  qual- 
ified sense.  Mr.  Hillquit,  in  the  following  passage  in 
"Socialism:  Promise  or  Menace?"  has  well  expressed  the 
limitation  of  meaning  with  which  the  word  "authority" 
may  be  rightly  used  in  Socialist  exposition  and  propa- 
ganda : 

The  expression  "Socialist  authorities"  must  ...  be  taken 
in  a  very  restricted  sense.  Socialists  are  no  respecters  of 
"authorities."  They  do  not  accept  the  conclusions  of  their 
writers  on  faith.  The  leaders  of  Socialist  thought  are  those 
who  have  been  able  to  state  their  social  and  economic  theories 
with  the  greatest  degree  of  convincingness;  and  the  ability  to 
substantiate  their  views  with  facts  and  arguments  always  re- 
mains the  test  of  their  authoritativeness. 

Socialism  as  an  organized  movement  is  the  subject  of 
a  succeeding  pamphlet  (No.  Ill)  and  is  therefore  given 
but  scant  mention  here.  So,  also,  political  economy  as 
explained  by  Socialists  is  but  briefly  summarized  here, 
since  a  detailed  treatment  of  the  fundamental  Socialist 
positions  is  given  in  Pamphlet  No.  II.  W.  J.  G. 


THE  ELEMENTS  OF  SOCIALISM 
I. 

WHAT  SOCIALISM  IS. 

Socialism  is  the  collective  ownership  and  democratic  man- 
agement of  the  social  m,eans  of  production  for  the  common  good. 

We  use  the  general  term  "collective,"  rather  than  some 
more  specific  term,  because  common  ownership  under  Social- 
ism will  no  doubt  take  on  various  forms — ^national,  state, 
municipal,  labor-union  and  co-operative. 

We  say  "democratic  management"  because  collectivism 
without  democracy  would  not  be  Socialism. 

We  say  the  "social  means"  of  production  instead  of  "all 
means"  because,  as  all  Socialists  agree,  many  kinds  of  small 
industry  will  probably  be  left  in  private  hands.  It  is  the 
large-scale  industries,  the  industries  in  which  labor  is  performed 
socially,  by  groups  or  masses  of  men  working  with  tools  owned 
by  other  men,  that  Socialists  insist  shall  be  made  collective 
property. 

And,  finally,  we  say  the  "common  good"  rather  than  the 
"equal  good"  or  some  other  term  which  assumes  foreknowledge 
of  the  rule  of  recompense  for  labor  or  service  in  the  society 
of  the  future.  Socialism  strives  for  the  "greatest  good  of  the 
greatest  number,"  but  no  one  today  can  say  upon  what  basis 
the  apportioning  of  that  good  will  be  determined. 

COMPREHENSIVENESS   OF   SOCIALISM. 

It  is  evident  that  in  the  definition  given  Socialism  is  con- 
sidered as  a  social  ideal — a  proposed  or  anticipated  system  of 
society.  But  the  word  "Socialism,"  like  the  word  "Christianity," 
has  a  breadth,  an  inclusiveness,  which  takes  in  many  meanings. 
It  may  be  regarded: 

1.  In  a  usage  somewhat  loose  and  vague,  but  necessary 
from  a  genetic  or  historical  standpoint,  as  a  spirit,  a  passion, 
an  aspiration,  with  its  resulting  effort,  for  industrial  equality. 

2.  As  a  theory  of  social  evolution. 

3.  As  a  system  of  political  economy, 

4.  As  an  organized  international  movement. 

5.  As — in  the  definition  given  above — a  social  ideal. 

The  word  may  thus  be  used  in  the  sense  of  any  of  the 
definitions  given,  or  broadly  and  comprehensively,  in  a  sense 
including  all  of  them. 


Appeal  Socialist  Classics 


11. 

A  PASSION  FOR  INDUSTRIAL  EQUALITY. 

THE  LINK  WITH  THE  PAST. 

Though  scientific  Socialism  is  of  comparatively  recent  ori- 
gin, it  has  at  least  some  of  its  origins  far  back  in  ancient  times. 
The  degree  of  its  kinship  to  earlier  social  theories  and  move- 
ments is  variously  judged  by  Socialist  writers.  To  Morris 
Hillquit,  though  in  his  "History  of  Socialism  in  the  United 
States"  he  speaks  of  Wilhelm  Weitling  (1808-1871)  as  "the 
connecting  link  between  primitive  and  modern  Socialism,"  pres- 
ent-day Socialism  is  wholly  dissociated  from  the  ancient  and 
medieval  Utopias  and  communistic  societies.     He  says: 

Socialism  is  distinctly  a  modern  movement.  Contrary 
to  prevailing  notions,  it  has  no  connection,  historical  or  in- 
tellectual, with  the  Utopias  of  Plato  or  More,  or  with  the 
practices  of  the  communistic  sects  of  former  ages. 

The  Socialist  movement  was  called  into  life  by  economic 
conditions  which  have  sprung  up  within  very  recent  periods. 
Its  program  is  an  attempted  solution  of  the  problems 
inherent  in  these  conditions.* 

To  Karl  Kautsky  and  Eduard  Bernstein  there  is  a  direct  re- 
lation between  modern  Socialism  and  at  least  the  social  move- 
ments and  reconstructive  schemes  which  immediately  preceded 
it.  In  their  introduction  to  "Die  Vorlaufer  des  Neueren  Soz- 
ialismus"  they  say: 

A  deep  sympathy  must  unite  him  (the  modern  Social- 
ist) with  those  who  wanted  to  accomplish  similar  things 
and  aspired  to  the  same  goal  as  he.  The  fact  that  they 
aimed  at  the  impossible  and  failed,  must  rather  strengthen 
his  sympathies  for  them,  for  these  sympathies  are  nat- 
urally on  the  side  of  all  the  oppressed  and  downtrod- 
den. .  .  .  His  great  sympathy  for  those  who  went  before 
him  is,  for  the  modern  Socialist,  an  additional  reason  to 
devote  himself  to  a  deep  study  of  them;  and  it  is  clear  that 
it  will  be  easier  for  a  Socialist  than  for  a  bourgeois  writer 


*"Sociali3m  Summed  Up,"  p.  7. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism 


to  grasp  and  understand  the  emotional  and  thought  life  of 
previous  Socialists.* 

To  another  writer  the  connection  is  one  of  an  unbroken 
chain  from  remote  antiquity: 

THE  MORAL  GENESIS  OF  SOCIALISM. 

BY  WALTER  THOMAS  MILLS. 

The  ideals  which  have  finally  grown  into  the  proposals 
of  the  Socialists  were  voiced  by  prophets,  poets  and  dream- 
ers long  centuries  before  the  industrial  and  economic  condi- 
tions were  so  developed  as  to  make  inevitable  the  coming 
into  actual  life  and  form  of  these  dreams  of  the  dream- 
ers. ...  It  is  certain  that  these  dreams  of  the  long  past 
were  grounded  on  real  and  lasting  factors  in  human  life. 

It  would  be  easy  to  sneer  at  the  ancestry  of  scientific 
Socialism,  but  these  dreams  and  hopes  were  really  dreamed 
about  and  hoped  for,  and  even  this  dreaming  and  hoping 
are  a  part  of  the  facts  which  scientific  students  of  the  sub- 
ject of  Socialism  must  not  ignore. 

The  first  efforts  to  put  into  working  form  the  proposals 
of  the  Socialists  were  in  the  form  of  Utopian  pictures.  The 
first  efforts  in  modern  times  to  organize  workers  into  pro- 
ductive bodies  for  the  mutual  benefit  of  the  workers  only 
were  made  by  co-operative  colonies.   .    .    . 

The  Utopian  dreams  are  so  old  as  to  suggest  that  they 
may  have  come  to  us  as  survivals  of  the  primeval  brother- 
hoods, seeking  to  adjust  themselves  to  the  successive 
environments  of  the  various  stages  of  man's  industrial  ad- 
vance. Plato's  "Republic"  was  among  the  earliest  of  these 
pictures,  and  he  says  in  his  introduction  that  his  work  was 
suggested  by  a  visit  to  the  ceremonies  of  a  dedication  by 
one  of  the  Grecian  trade-unions,  and  there  can  be  little 
doubt  that  these  very  ancient  organizations  of  workers 
v/ere  direct  survivals  from,  or  reversions  to,  the  more 
ancient  tribal  organizations.   .    .    . 


•Quoted  by   Untermann:      "Marxian   Economics,"  pp.   13-14. 


Appeal  Socialist  Classics 


THE  BASIS  OF  DIFFERENCE. 

The  one  thing  which  marks  the  transition  from  these 
Utopian  efforts  to  the  propaganda  of  the  scientific  Socialists 
is  the  difference  in  the  basis  of  the  reasoning  of  the  advc-- 
cates  of  the  older  and  the  newer  schools.  The  principles  of 
collectivism,  democracy  and  equality  had  all  been  declared 
for  and  defended  for  centuries  before  the  formulation  and 
defense  of  the  doctrines  of  scientific  Socialism.  In  more 
recent  years  it  had  been  attempted  to  introduce  these  prin- 
ciples into  the  government  of  industries,  but  the  reasons 
assigned  for  doing  so  and  the  plans  proposed  were  not 
based  on  the  new  philosophy  of  evolution.   .    .    . 

Before  the  teaching  of  the  evolutionary  philosophy  the 
proposals  of  the  Socialists  had  been  presented  as  the  wise 
plans  of  some  philanthropists,  and  naturally  on  lines  of 
enterprise  sufficiently  limited  to  be  within  the  reasonable 
enterprise  of  some  such  benefactor.  They  were  not  pre- 
sented as  the  necessary  result  of  preceding  conditions,  nor 
as  the  necessary  outgrowth  of  industrial  development. 
Again,  the  industrial  revolution  centralized  and  equipped 
industry  on  so  large  a  scale  as  to  suggest  the  collective 
ownership  and  democratic  use  of  the  means  of  production, 
and  therefore  helped  to  transfer  the  foundations  of  the 
argument  from  philanthropic  ideals  to  economic  causes.'* 

THE  TRANSITION   FROM   UTOPIA  TO   SCIENCE. 

Admitting  the  general  truth  of  Hillquit's  statement,  one 
may  still  say  that  Socialism  is  a  modern  manifestation  of  that 
ages-long  yearning  of  human  beings  for  a  better  order  of  social 
relationship.  Among  all  peoples,  in  all  ages,  this  aspiration  has 
existed.  It  has,  of  course,  taken  on  different  forms  in  accord 
with  the  material  environment  out  of  which  it  grew.  Not  in 
all  men  has  this  aspiration  dwelt,  for  the  cunning  and  strong 
have  ever  found  it  better  for  themselves  that  conditions  should 
be  unequal.  But  among  all  peoples  it  has  existed,  and  today  it 
flowers  in  a  certitude  of  faith  which  never  characterized  it 
before. 

It  is  the  form  of  this  aspiration  which  today  differs  from 


*"Tlie   Struggle   for  Existence,"  pp.  237-240. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism 


that  of  all  other  days.  Today,  as  in  every  other  time,  it  grows 
out  of  the  material  environment:  a  sense  of  the  imperfection  of 
life  as  it  is  prompts  men  inevitably  to  hope  and  strive  for  a 
better  life.  But  the  material  environment  of  today — that  is,  in 
large  part,  the  prevailing  system  of  production  and  distribu- 
tion— when  studied  and  compared  with  the  systems  which  pre- 
ceded it,  furnishes  us  with  a  definite  concept  of  history,  a  defi- 
nite analysis  of  social  factors  and  a  systematized  effort  for 
attaining  the  desired  goal. 

The  Socialist  movement  has  its  scientific  basis  in  a  cer- 
tain theory  of  social  evolution.  This  theory  was  formulated  by 
Karl  Marx  (1818-1883)  and  Friedrich  Engels  (1820-1895). 
Previous  to  about  1850  Socialist  projects  and  theories  were  gen- 
erally of  a  character  now  called  "utopian"  (from  Sir  Thomas 
More's  "Utopia,"  no  place).  That  is,  they  were  idealistic  and 
visionary — the  proposals  or  projected  systems  of  men  who  be- 
lieved that  the  drawing  up  of  an  attractive  and  elaborately 
detailed  scheme  of  society  was  all  that  was  necessary  to  insure 
its  acceptance  by  all  kinds  and  conditions  of  men. 

With  the  publication,  in  January,  1848,  of  the  "Communist 
Manifesto,"*  by  Marx  and  Engels,  modern  or  scientific  Social- 
ism begins.  The  underlying  idea  of  that  work  is  the  develop- 
ment of  society,  through  constant  changes,  necessitated  by 
changes  in  the  mode  of  producing  and  distributing  wealth.  "In 
every  historical  epoch,"  as  Engels  later  summarized  this  prin- 
ciple, "the  prevailing  mode  of  economic  production  and  ex- 
change, and  the  social  organization  necessarily  following  from 
it,  form  the  basis  upon  which  is  built  up,  and  from  which  alone 
can  be  explained,  the  political  and  intellectual  history  of  that 
epoch." 


*The  word  "Communist"  vas  then,  and  for  some  time  after- 
ward, the  accepted  term  for  a  radical  or  revolutionary  Socialist. 
The  word  "Socialist"  appears  to  have  been  first  used  about  1827 
by  a  disciple  of  Robert  Owen.  It  did  not  become  common  f«r 
several  years,  and  not  until  about  the  end  of  the  sixties  did  it 
come  to  have  its  present  meaning,  supplanting  the  word  "Com- 
munist" in  ordinary  use  and  leaving  that  term  to  designate  one 
who  believes  in  a  community  of  goods. 


10  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

III. 
A  THEORY  OF  SOCIAL  EVOLUTION. 

The  gradual  acceptance  of  the  principles  put  forth  in  the 
little  work  of  Marx  and  Engels  and  of  other  works  by  the 
same  authors  that  followed  it,  completely  altered  the  character 
of  Socialism.  It  had  now  become  a  theory  of  social  evolution — 
an  interpretation  of  the  successive  changes  in  society  and  a 
reasoned  prediction  of  other  changes  to  come.  "Socialism," 
says  Spargo,  "had  become  a  science  instead  of  a  dream."  The 
basis  of  this  altered  view  is  what  is  known  as  the  "materialist 
conception  of  history,"  or  the  "economic  interpretation  of  his- 
tory," or  "economic  determinism." 

THE  ECONOMIC  INTERPRETATION  OF  HISTORY, 

BY  JOHN  SPARGO. 

As  a  theory  of  social  evolution  Socialism  has  for  its 
primary  postulate  the  necessity  of  a  constant  change  and 
growth  of  the  social  organism.  .  .  .  The  distinctive  fea- 
ture of  the  Socialist  theory  of  social  evolution,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  other  theories,  is  the  so-called  "material- 
istic conception  of  history,"  formulated  by  Marx  and  his 
great  co-worker,  Friedrich  Engels.  The  essence  of  this 
theory,  its  root  principle,  is  that  the  main  impelling  force 
which  to  a  large  extent  determines  the  time  and  character 
of  the  changes  in  social  organization  which  we  call  the 
epochs  of  history,  is  economic,  rising  out  of  the  methods  of 
producing  and  distributing  wealth. 

Slave  labor  broke  up  the  pre-historic  communism,  and 
the  development  of  that  system  of  production  established 
private  property  and  an  individualistic  code  of  ethics  to  a 
replace  that  of  the  tribe.  The  rise  of  the  feudal  system  J- 
may  be  traced  to  definite  economic  causes  as  clearly  as 
the  rise  of  capitalism  may  be  traced  to  the  workshop  sys- 
tem, and  its  development  to  the  great  mechanical  inven- 
tions of  the  eighteenth  century.  Just  as  the  term  feudalism 
comprehends  something  more  than  the  economic  arrange- 
ments existing  between   lords   and   serfs,   and   covers   the 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  11 

whole  social  and  political  life  of  an  epoch  in  history,  with 
its  military  system,  its  jurisprudence,  its  intellectual  life, 
so  the  term  capitalism  comprehends  much  more  than  a  sys- 
tem of  wage-paid  labor. 

THE  MAIN   FORCE   ECONOMIC. 

I  have  said  that  the  distictive  features  of  this  theory 
of  social  evolution,  this  philosophy  of  historical  develop- 
ment, is  that  the  main  determinant  force  is  economic, 
including  in  that  term  all  the  economic  factors,  including 
even  climate.  Other  forces  enter  into  the  stream  of  causes. 
Religion,  superstitution,  custom,  ethics  and  patriotism  have 
each  exerted  considerable  influence,  but  when  all  possible 
allowance  is  made  for  these  great  forces  the  sum  of  eco- 
nomic conditions  still  remains  the  principal  force  impelling 
the  race-life  onward. 

You  will  see  at  once  that  this  is  very  far  from  being 
the  gospel  of  economic  fatalism  which  it  is  sometimes  cari- 
catured as  being,  alike  by  superficial  critics  and  friends.  It 
does  not  imply  that  individuals  are  inspired  solely  by  sordid 
greed,  a  proposition  which  no  one  really  believes.  It  does, 
however,  imply  that  men  generally  act  in  accordance  with 
their  consciously  felt  interests,  of  which  economic  interests 
are  always  the  most  important  and  urgent.  This  will  .  .  . 
serve  to  explain  why  kind-hearted  men  and  women  known 
to  you  will  oppose  the  measures  you  are  forced  to  advocate 
for  social  betterment.  It  will  help  you  to  understand  why  a 
great  corporation  like  Trinity  church  owns  slum  property 
and  opposes  tenement  house  legislation,  and  why  men  and 
women  who  are  known  to  you  as  earnest  Christians  and 
most  generous  persons  will  oppose  measures  aiming  to  do 
away  with  the  evils  of  child  labor. 

If  you  use  it  wisely  it  will  illumine  for  you  many  a 
page  of  history  which  would  otherwise  be  obscure,  but  if 
you  use  it  fanatically  and  without  reason  it  will  land  you 
in  foolish  and  untenable  positions.- 


"'Capitalist  and   Laborer,"   pp.   97-100. 


12  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

THE  CLASS  STRUGGLE. 

It  is  a  part  of  the  economic  interpretation  of  history,  as 
keld  by  Socialists,  to  maintain  that  since  the  dissolution  of 
primitive  tribal  society  social  processes  have  inevitably  grouped 
men  in  economic  classes.     In  the  words  of  Marx  and  Engels: 

The  history  of  all  hitherto  existing  society  is  the  his- 
tory of  class  struggles. 

Freeman  and  slave,  patrician  and  plebeian,  lord  and 
serf,  guildmaster  and  journeyman,  in  a  word,  oppressor  and 
oppressed,  stood  in  constant  opposition  to  one  another,  car- 
ried on  an  uninterrupted,  now  hidden,  now  open  fight,  that 
each  time  ended,  either  in  revolutionary  reconstitution  of 
society  at  large,  or  in  the  common  ruin  of  the  contending 
classes. 

In  the  earlier  epochs  of  history  we  find  almost  every- 
where a  complicated  arrangement  of  society  into  various 
•rders,  a  manifold  gradation  of  social  rank.  In  ancient 
Rome  we  have  patricians,  knights,  plebeians,  slaves;  in  the 
middle  ages,  feudal  lords,  vassals,  guildmasters,  journey- 
men, apprentices,  serfs ;  in  almost  all  of  these  classes,  again 
subordinate  gradations. 

The  modern  bourgeois  society  that  has  sprouted  from 
the  ruins  of  feudal  society  has  not  done  away  with  class 
antagonisms.  It  has  but  established  new  classes,  new  condi- 
tions of  oppression,  new  forms  of  struggle  in  place  of 
©Id  ones. 

Our  epoch,  the  epoch  of  the  bourgeois,  possesses,  how- 
ever, this  distinctive  feature:  it  has  simplified  the  class 
antagonisms.  Society  as  a  whole  is  more  and  more  splitting 
up  into  two  great  hostile  camps,  into  two  great  classes 
directly  facing  each  other,  bourgeoisie  and  proletariat.* 


*"The  Communist  Manifesto"  (Socialist  Literature  Company 
edition),  pp.  10-11.  "By  bourgeoisie,"  the  authors  explain,  "is  meant 
the  class  of  modern  capitalists,  owners  of  the  means  of  social  pro- 
duction and  employers  of  wage  labor.  By  proletariat,  the  class  of 
Modern  wage  laborers  who,  having  no  means  of  production  of  their 
•wn,  are  reduced  to  selling  their  labor  power  in  order  to  live." 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  18 


PRESENT-DAY  CLASSES. 

An  economic  class  .  .  .  is  an  aggregate  of  persons 
whose  specific  economic  functions  and  interests  are  similar, 
and  who  therefore  bear  a  common  relation  to  the  prevailing 
economic  system.  In  all  communities  of  persons  who  pro- 
duce goods  for  individual  profit  there  exists,  necessarily, 
an  antagonism  of  material  interests.  These  persons  may 
have  like  general  interests;  as  consumers  they  will  all  want 
goods  at  low  prices;  they  may  equally  desire  peace,  pros- 
perity and  health;  they  may  have  an  equal  interest  in 
salubrity  of  climate  and  fertility  of  soil.  But  their  par- 
ticular interests  vary  and  conflict  in  accord  with  the  dif- 
ferent methods  by  which  the  individuals  make  their  living.* 

The  mass  of  occupied  persons  in  the  United  States  today 
may  be  divided,  on  the  basis  of  function  and  interest,  into  the 
following  classes:  I,  Wage-earning  producers,  or  proletarians; 
II,  Self-employing  producers,  such  as  working  farmers  and 
handicraftsmen;  III,  Social  servants,  such  as  educators,  cler- 
gymen, physicians,  artists,  writers  and  employes  of  public  in- 
stitutions; IV,  Active  capitalists,  engaged  in  manufacture,  trade 
or  development;  V,  Idle  capitalists;  VI,  Retainers,  persons  whose 
function  is  to  contribute  solely  or  predominantly  to  the  direct 
service  of  the  capitalists. 

A  recent  argument  has  been  advanced  that  the  wage- 
earning  producers  are  actually  divisable  into  two  classes — the 
skilled  and  the  unskilled;  but  though  short-sighted  policies 
practiced  by  both  wings  have  sometimes  indicated  a  conflict 
of  interests,  their  fundamentally  common  cause  is  coming  to 
be  better  understood  day  by  day. 

No  study  of  present-day  society  can  afford  to  ignore  the 
various  group  and  class  formations,  based  upon  particular 
interests.  The  fact  remains,  however,  that  the  chief  struggle 
is  that  between  the  proletarians  on  the  one  hand  and  the  capi- 
talists on  the  other. 

WAGE-EARNER  VS.  CAPITALIST. 

BY   MORRIS   HILLQUIT. 

Modern  society  is  split  into  two  principal  economic 
classes:  the  users  of  the  machinery  of  production,  who  do 


•"Mass  and  Class,"  pp.  37-38. 


14  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

not  own  it ;  and  the  owners,  who  do  not  use  it ;  the  employ- 
era  and  the  employes,  the  capitalists  and  the  workers,  those 
who  derive  their  income  from  "profits"  and  those  who  de- 
pend for  their  living  on  "wages." 

The  classes  are  not  fixed  by  law,  but  they  are  deter- 
mined just  as  effectively  by  economic  position,  and  as  the 
modern  industrial  system  is  unfolding,  they  tend  to  become 
permanent  and  even  hereditary.  A  lucky  workingman  or 
clerk  may  still  occasionally  be  lifted  into  the  coveted  realms 
of  wealth  and  power,  but  the  probabilities  of  such  a  rise 
are  not  much  greater  than  were  the  proverbial  chances  of 
a  soldier  in  the  Napoleonic  army  to  be  advanced  to  the 
rank  of  field  marshal.  The  vast  mass  of  wage-earners  are 
doomed  to  factory  work  for  life,  and  their  children  are 
predestined  factory  hands. 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  FIXED  CASTE. 

And  similarly,  capitalism  is  rapidly  becoming  a  heredi- 
tary status.  The  "self-made  man,"  the  pioneer  of  a  new 
industry,  is  fast  passing  away.  Modern  wealth  is  largely 
in  the  hands  of  second  or  third  generations.  The  gay  heir 
who  squanders  his  fortune  and  is  reduced  to  the  original 
poverty  of  his  grandsires,  becomes  rarer,  as  the  fortunes  of 
the  individual  capitalists  grow  in  bulk,  and  corporate  man- 
agement supersedes  individual  initiative. 

It  is  not  contended  that  the  entire  population  is  defi- 
nitely divided  into  the  two  classes  mentioned.  There  are, 
of  course,  the  more  or  less  indefinite  and  undefinable  groups, 
generally  designated  as  the  "middle  classes,"  with  all 
shades  of  special  interests,  but  the  main  factors  in  modern 
industrial  life  are  clearly  represented  by  the  two  most  pro- 
nounced types  or  classes — the  capitalists  and  the  wage- 
earners — the  latter  comprising  all  grades  of  hired  manual 
and  mental  workers. 

And  there  is  war  between  and  among  the  classes. 
War,  sometimes  overt  and  violent,  sometimes  concealed  and 
even  unconscious,  but  war  nevertheless.    The  war  is  all  the 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  15 

more  intense  and  irrepressible  because  it  springs  not  from 
personal  hostility  or  accidental  misunderstandings,  but 
from  ever-present  organic  economic  antagonism.- 

THE  AGE  OF  MACHINERY. 

The  basic  industrial  fact  in  the  economic  changes  of  the 
last  150  years  is  the  development  of  machinery.  Before  this 
development  began,  the  production  of  goods  for  the  market 
was  largely  the  work  of  individuals  or  families  or  small  groups, 
using  their  own  tools  and  selling  their  products  for  their  own 
benefit.  With  the  perfecting  of  machinery,  production  concen- 
trated in  factories  and  workshops  wherein  the  tools  or  machin- 
ery were  owned  by  one  man  or  set  of  men  and  were  used  by 
groups  or  masses  of  workers  employed  at  wages.  This  indus- 
trial evolution  is  well  summarized  in  the  following  excerpt  from 
a  popular  pamphlet,  entitled  "Inti'oduction  to  Socialism": 

BY  NOBLE  A.  RICHARDSON. 

The  century  just  closed  may  be  considered  the  first  in 
the  "Age  of  Machinery."  Place  the  machinery  of  1800 
beside  that  of  1900,  and  the  former  sinks  into  insignificance. 
The  great  machines  of  today  are  mainly  the  product  of 
nineteenth  century  thought. 

But  the  "growth  of  machinery"  is  not  spontaneous, 
and  in  rare  cases,  indeed,  is  the  completion  of  a  great 
machine  an  isolated  accomplishment.  It  is  started  by  some 
one  in  a  comparatively  rude  and  simple  form.  This  sug- 
gests to  some  other  observer  and  thinker  changes,  or  im- 
provements, or  total  reconstruction ;  and  this  second  prod- 
uct commonly  meets  the  same  fate  as  its  predecessor. 

Thus,  the  machine  that  can  do  the  work  formerly  done 
by  two  men  suggests  the  one  that  can  do  the  work  of  ten, 
and  this,  in  turn,  the  one  that  can  do  the  work  of  fifty,  and 
so  on,  in  some  instances,  to  the  one  that  can  do  more  than 
could  be  done  by  a  thousand  men  working  as  their  ancestors 
of  1800  worked. 

It  was  in  this  way  that  most  of  our  great  machines 


•"Socialism  Summed  Up,"  pp.  13-14. 


16  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

have  been  wrought,  as  the  history  of  the  nineteenth  century 
bears  witness.  First,  the  small  machine,  then  the  greater 
and  better,  and  so  on  until  we  reach  the  marvels  of  today. 

EFFECTS  OF  MACHINE  DEVELOPMENT. 

But  along  with  this  development  of  machinery,  this 
concentration  of  producing  power,  have  come  other  changes 
that  are  its  necessary  concomitants,  that  must  needs  follow 
as  doth  the  night  the  day. 

The  small  machine  was  operated  by  the  small  capitalist, 
the  greater  machine  demanded  and,  as  we  shall  see  later, 
produced  the  greater  capitalist.  The  growth  of  the  wealth 
of  the  capitalist  has  paralleled  that  of  the  machine  and  kept 
fully  up  to  date.  Certainly  the  contrast  between  the  wealth 
of  the  capitalists  of  1800  and  those  of  1900  is  as  striking 
as  that  between  the  machines  of  these  dates.  And  we  think 
this  comparison  will  reveal  about  the  same  ratio  for  any 
decade  of  that  century.  Of  course,  we  include  in  this  com- 
parison every  labor-saving  (or  displacing)  device  as  a 
machine,  e.  g.,  railways,  steamboats,  telegraphs  and  tele- 
phones, as  well  as  reapers,  looms,  trip  hammers  and  trusts. 

Again,  the  small  machine  was  operated  in  the  small 
factory,  the  greater  one  in  the  greater  factory,  and  the 
growth  of  the  factory  has  kept  pace  with  that  of  the  ma- 
chine and  capitalist,  until  we  now  have  the  gigantic  produc- 
tive concern  that  is  more  typical  of  Teutonic  civilization 
than  is  any  other  of  our  institutions,  except  it  be  a  public 
school  house. 

BEGINNINGS   OF   THE   WAGE-EARNING   CLASS. 

And  along  with  the  development  of  the  machine,  the 
capitalist  and  the  factory,  has  come  another  change  that  we 
must  not  overlook — a  change  in  the  social  and  economic 
conditions  and  relations  of  individuals.  In  1800  we  were  a 
nation  of  individual  or  independent  workers.  Men  made 
their  own  chairs  and  tables  and  wooden  plows  and  the 
women  spun  their  own  and  their  families'  garments.     The 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  17 

neighborhood  blacksmith  made  everything  from  raw  ma- 
terial, and  as  late  as  1870  was  still  making  his  horseshoes, 
and  even  horsenails.  Production  was  carried  on  on  the 
individualistic  plan.  With  the  growth  of  the  machine  and 
factory  these  occupations  were  concentrated  and  performed, 
not  by  men  working  each  for  himself  and  with  the  tools 
that  he  owned,  and  perhaps  made,  but  by  men  and  women 
working  for  the  owners  of  the  factory  and  the  tools.  Pro- 
duction became  collective;  the  former  independent  worker 
who  lived  in  the  country  became  a  hired  man,  a  wage 
earner,  who  lived  in  a  village,  and  then  in  a  city.  In  all  this 
series  of  developments  and  changes,  none,  perhaps,  has 
been  more  marked  than  the  revolution  that  has  taken  place 
in  the  social  and  industrial  relations  of  those  concerned  in 
production. 

We  do  not  cite  these  things  for  the  purpose  of  decrying 
them.  Far  from  it.  They  are  the  evidences  of  industrial 
growth,  products  of  the  keenest  and  best  thought  the  world 
has  produced,  proofs  of  the  application  of  scientific  investi- 
gation and  discovery  to  the  means  of  providing  for  the 
wants  of  man.  True,  at  each  step,  at  each  change,  some 
have  suffered,  and,  as  a  result  of  it  all,  millions  still  suffer. 
But  it  is  not  because  the  machine  and  factory  have  grown 
to  such  proportions;  not  because  nature's  forces  have  been 
enslaved  and  made  to  "turn  with  tireless  arm  the  countless 
wheels  of  toil."  If  aught  of  evil  has  come  of  all  this,  the 
fault  lies  with  ourselves.  We  are  not  making  proper  use  of 
this  progress,  are  not  directing  it  into  proper  channels.* 


'"Introduction   to   Socialism,"  pp.   3-5. 


18  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

CONCENTRATION  OF  INDUSTRY. 

Inevitably,  this  development  of  machinery  has  tended  to 
the  concentration  of  industry — to  the  elimination  of  the  smaller 
workshops  (except  those  that  render  some  special  or  local  ser- 
vice which  makes  competition  by  others  difficult)  and  to  the 
growth  of  the  larger  and  financially  stronger  workshops: 

BY  JOHN   SPARGO. 

The  Socialist  theory  is  that  competition  is  self-destruc- 
tive, and  that  the  inevitable  result  of  the  competitive  proc- 
ess is  to  produce  monopoly,  either  through  the  crushing  of 
the  weak  by  the  strong,  or  the  combination  of  units  as  a 
result  of  a  conscious  recognition  of  the  wastes  of  competi- 
tion and  the  advantages  of  co-operation.  The  law  of  capi- 
talist development,  therefore,  is  from  competition  and 
division  to  combination  and  concentration.  As  this  concen- 
tration proceeds,  a  large  class  of  proletarians  is  formed  on 
the  one  hand  and  a  small  class  of  capitalist  lords  on  the 
other,  an  essential  antagonism  of  interests  existing  between 
the  two  classes.  While  Socialism  does  not  preclude  the  con- 
tinued existence  of  small  private  industry  or  business,  it 
does  require  and  depend  upon  the  development  of  a  large 
body  of  concentrated  industry;  monopolies  which  can  be 
consciously  transformed  into  social  monopolies  whenever 
the  people  so  decide. 

The  inter-industrial  and  international  trustification  of 
industry  and  commerce  shows  a  remarkable  fulfillment  of 
the  law  of  capitalist  concentration  which  the  Socialists 
were  the  first  to  formulate ;  the  existence  of  petty  industries 
and  businesses,  or  their  increase  even,  being  a  relatively  in- 
significant matter  compared  with  the  enormous  increase  in 
large  industries  and  businesses.  In  agriculture,  concentra- 
tion, while  it  does  not  proceed  so  rapidly  or  directly  as  in 
manufacture  and  commerce,  and  while  it  takes  directions 
unforeseen  by  the  Socialists,  proceeds  surely  nevertheless. 

MASSING  OF  WEALTH   IN  FEWER  HANDS. 

Along  with  the  concentration  of  capital  and  industry 
proceeds  the  concentration  of  wealth  into  proportionately 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  19 

fewer  hands.  While  a  certain  diffusion  of  wealth  takes 
place  through  the  mechanism  of  industrial  concentration 
which  affords  numerous  small  investors  an  opportunity  to 
own  shares  in  great  industrial  and  commercial  corporations, 
it  is  not  sufficient  to  balance  the  expropriation  v/hich  goes 
on  in  the  competitive  struggle,  and  it  is  true  that  a  larger 
proportion  of  the  national  wealth  is  owned  by  a  minority 
of  the  population  than  ever  before,  that  minority  being  pro- 
portionately less  numerous  than  ever  before. 

Whatever  defects  there  may  be  in  the  Marxian  theory, 
and  whatever  modifications  of  it  may  be  rendered  necessary 
by  changed  conditions,  it  is  perfectly  certain  that  in  its 
main  and  essential  features  it  has  successfully  withstood 
all  the  criticisms  which  have  been  directed  against  it.  Eco- 
nomic literature  is  full  of  prophecies,  but  in  its  whole 
range  there  is  not  an  instance  of  prophecy  more  literally 
fulfilled  than  that  which  Marx  made  concerning  the  mode 
of  capitalist  development.  And  Karl  Marx  was  not  a 
prophet — he  but  read  clearly  the  meaning  of  certain  facts 
which  others  could  not  read;  the  law  of  social  dynamics. 
That  is  not  prophecy,  but  science.* 

THE  TRUST. 

Out  of  this  concentration  of  industry  has  come  the  trust — 
the  one  big,  conspicuous  fact  which  everyone  can  see,  no  mat- 
ter how  blind  he  may  be  to  other  and  quite  as  important  eco- 
nomic facts.  The  Socialist  position,  both  as  to  the  origin  and 
development  of  trusts  and  as  to  the  logical  attitude  to  be  taken 
toward  them,  is  expressed  by  Mr.  Benson  as  follows: 

BY  ALLAN   L.   BENSON. 

No  Socialist  was  ever  heard  finding  fault  with  a  trust 
simply  for  existing.  A  Socialist  would  as  soon  find  fault 
with  a  green  apple  because  it  had  been  produced  from  a 
blossom.  In  fact.  Socialists  regard  the  trusts  as  the  green 
apples   upon   the  tree  of   industrial   evolution.     But   they 


'"Socialism"  (1906),  pp.  120-122. 


Appeal  Socialist  Classics 


would  no  more  destroy  these  industrial  green  apples  that 
are  making  the  world  sick  than  they  would  destroy  the 
green  apples  that  make  small  boys  sick.  They  pause,  first 
because  they  are  evolutionists,  not  only  in  biology,  but  in 
everything;  second,  because  they  recall  that  the  green 
apples  that  make  the  boy  sick  will,  if  left  to  ripen,  make 
the  man  well.  In  short.  Socialists  regard  trusts,  or  private 
monopolies,  as  a  necessary  stage  in  industrial  evolution;  a 
stage  that  we  could  not  have  avoided ;  a  stage  that  in  many 
respects  represents  a  great  advance  over  any  phase  of  civ- 
ilization that  preceded  it,  yet  a  stage  at  which  we  cannot 
stop  unless  civilization  stops.  Therefore,  Socialists  take 
this  position: 

It  is  flying  in  the  face  of  evolution  itself  to  talk  about 
destroying,  or  even  eflFectually  regulating  the  trusts. 

Private  monopolies  cannot  be  destroyed  except  as  green 
apples  can  be  destroyed — by  crushing  them  and  staying  the 
evolutionary  processes  that,  if 'left  alone,  will  yield  good 
fruit. 

Private  monopolies  cannot  be  effectually  regulated  be- 
cause, so  long  as  they  are  permitted  to  exist,  they  will  regu- 
late the  government  instead  of  permitting  the  government 
to  regulate  them.  They  will  regulate  the  government  be- 
cause the  great  profits  at  stake  will  give  them  the  incentive 
to  do  so  and  the  enormous  capital  at  their  command  will 
gi-ve  them  the  power  to  do  so. 

NO  INTERFERENCE  WITH  EVOLUTION. 

In  other  words.  Socialists  say  that  the  processes  of 
evolution  should  go  on.  What  do  they  mean  by  this?  They 
mean  that  the  good  elements  of  the  trust  principle  should 
be  preserved  and  the  bad  elements  destroyed.  What  are 
the  good  elements?  The  economies  of  large,  well-ordered 
production,  and  the  avoidance  of  the  waste  due  to  hap- 
hazard, competitive  production.  And  the  bad  elements? 
The  powers  that  private  monopoly  gives,  through  control  of 
market  and  governmental  policies,  to  rob  the  consumer. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  21 

Socialists  contend  that  the  good  can  be  saved  and  the 
bad  destroyed  by  converting  the  private  monopoJies  into 
public  monopolies — in  other  words,  by  letting  the  govern- 
ment own  the  trusts  and  the  people  own  the  government. 
This  may  seem  like  what  the  foes  of  Socialism  would  call  a 
"patent  nostrum."  It  is  nothing  of  the  kind.  It  is  bo  more 
a  patent  nostrum  than  the  trusts  are  patent  nostruims.  So- 
cialists invented  neither  private  monopolies  nor  public 
monopolies.  Socialists  did  not  kill  competition.  Competi- 
tion killed  itself.  Socialists  simply  were  able  to  foresee 
that  too  much  competition  would  end  all  competition  and 
thus  give  birth  to  private  monopoly. 

And,  having  seen  thus  far,  they  looked  a  little  further 
and  saw  that  private  monopoly  would  not  be  an  unmixed 
blessing.  They  saw  that  under  it,  robbery  would  be  prac- 
ticed in  new,  strange  and  colossal  forms.  They  kmew  the 
people  would  not  like  robbery  in  any  form.  They  knew 
they  would  cry  out  against  it  as  they  are  crying  out  against 
the  trusts  today.  And  they  believed  that,  after  having  tried 
to  regulate  the  trusts  and  failed  at  that,  the  people  would 
cease  trying  to  buck  evolution,  and  get  for  themselves  the 
benefits  of  the  trusts  by  owning  them. 

TRUST  ABOLITION   OF   WASTE. 

This  may  be  an  absurd  idea,  but  in  part,  at  least,  it 
has  already  been  verified.  It  has  been  demonstrated  that 
private  monopoly  saves  the  enormous  sums  that  were  spent 
in  the  competitive  era  to  determine  whether  this  man  or 
that  man  should  get  the  profit  upon  the  things  you  buy. 
The  consumer  has  absolutely  no  interest  in  the  identity  of 
the  capitalist  who  exploits  him.  But  when  capitalists  were 
competing  for  trade,  the  consumer  was  made  to  bear  the 
whole  cost  of  fighting  for  his  trade. 

Private  monopoly  has  largely  done  away  with  the  cost 
of  selling  trust  goods,  by  doing  away  with  the  individual 
competitors  who  were  once  struggling  to  put  their  goods 
upon  the  market.     Private  monopoly  has  also  reduced  the 


22  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

cost  of  production  by  introducing  the  innumerable  econ- 
omies that  accompany  large  production. 

What  private  monopoly  has  not  done  and  will  never 
do  is  to  pass  along  these  savings  to  the  consumers.  The 
monopolists  have  passed  along  some  of  the  savings,  but  not 
many  of  them.  What  they  have  passed  along  bears  but  a 
small  proportion  to  what  they  have  kept.  That  is  what 
most  of  the  trouble  is  about  now.  The  people  find  it  in- 
creasingly diflBcult  to  live.  For  a  dozen  years,  it  has  been 
increasingly  difficult  to  live.  Persistent  and  more  persistent 
has  been  the  demand  that  something  be  done  about  the 
trusts. 

FUTILITY  OF  TRUST  REGULATION. 

The  first  demand  was  that  the  trusts  be  destroyed. 
Now,  Mr.  Bryan  is  about  the  only  man  in  the  country  to 
whom  the  conviction  has  not  been  borne  home  that  the 
trusts  cannot  be  destroyed.  The  rest  of  the  people  want 
the  trusts  regulated,  and  the  worst  of  the  trust  magnates 
sent  to  jail.  Up  to  date,  not  a  single  trust  has  been  regu- 
lated, nor  a  single  trust  magnate  sent  to  jail. 

Officially,  of  course,  the  Standard  Oil  company,  the 
American  Tobacco  com.pany  and  the  Coal  Trust  have  been 
cleansed  in  the  blue  waters  of  the  supreme  court  laundry 
and  hung  upon  the  line  as  white  as  snow.  But  gentlemen 
who  are  not  stone  blind  know  that  this  is  not  so.  They 
know  the  Standard  Oil  company,  the  American  Tobacco 
company  and  the  Coal  Trust  have  merely  put  on  masks  and 
gone  on  with  the  hold-up  business.  Therefore,  the  Socialist 
predictions  of  seventy  years  ago  have  all  been  verified  up 
to  and  including  the  inability  of  any  government  either  to 
destroy  or  regulate  the  trusts.* 


*"The  Truth  About  Socialism,"  pp.  12-15. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  23 


THE  SOCIALIST   INDICTMENT  OF  CAPITALISM. 

Socialism,  as  a  theory  of  social  evolution,  includes  not  only 
an  interpretation  of  the  successive  changes  so  far  in  economic 
processes  and  their  consequent  social  and  political  results,  but 
also  a  reasoned  prediction  of  further  changes.  It  shows  the 
development  of  society  through  many  forms,  such  as  the  tribal 
communism  of  the  primitive  peoples,  the  pastoral  societies  of 
the  Jews  and  Arabs,  what  is  known  as  the  "household  economy" 
of  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  the  "town  economy"  of  the  medi- 
eval cities  of  Europe;  slavery,  which  has  permeated  all  forms 
of  society;  feudalism;  the  succeeding  system  of  small-unit  pro- 
duction which  prevailed  until  steam  was  applied  to  machinery, 
and  which  has  also  generally  obtained  among  pioneer  peoples, 
and  lastly,  capitalism,  the  system  which  now  prevails  in  all 
developed  or  partly  developed  countries  of  the  globe.  It  is  this 
system,  with  its  manifold  evils  and  its  inherent  contradictions, 
which  the  Socialist  movement  relentlessly  opposes.  A  compre- 
hensive statement  of  its  main  evils  is  contained  in  the  follow- 
ing pages: 

BY   MORRIS  HILLQUIT. 

The  distinguishing  feature  of  Socialism  as  a  social 
philosophy  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  more  scientific  in  its 
criticism  and  more  radical  in  its  remedy. 

Socialism  proceeds  from  a  thoroughgoing  analysis  of 
the  practical  workings  of  the  existing  economic,  political 
and  social  institutions.  It  refuses  to  treat  their  multiform 
shortcomings  as  accidental  and  unrelated  phenomena,  and 
endeavors  to  establish  their  mutual  bearings  and  to  discover 
their  common  source.  Its  attack  is  directed  primarily 
against  that  source,  the  underlying  social  wrong,  which  is 
the  root  of  all  minor  and  specific  complaints. 

The  most  serious  social  problems  which  confront  the 
present  generation  may  be  grouped  under  five  main  heads, 
which  together  cover  practically  all  phases  of  our  communal 
existence — the  economic,  cultural,  social,  political  and  intel- 
lectual. Of  these  the  economic  problem  is  by  far  the  most 
important,  and  deserves  our  first  attention. 

COMPETITION   AND  ITS   RESULTS. 

The  striking  feature  of  the  modern  plan  of  industrial 
organization  in  its  early  phases  of  development  is  the  lack 


24  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

of  plan  and  absence  of  organization.  In  the  most  vital 
function  of  associated  human  beings,  the  "production  of 
wealth,"  which  means  the  process  of  sustaining  life,  anarchy 
reigns  supreme.  The  necessaries  and  comforts  of  the  com- 
munity are  not  produced  on  an  intelligent  plan  based!  on  the 
needs  of  the  population  and  the  available  supply  of  raw  ma- 
terial and  productive  forces.  They  are  created  and  thrown 
into  the  market  pell-mell  by  an  indeterminate  number  of 
individual,  competing  and  unorganized  manufacturers. 

The  system  involves  an  insane  waste  of  humaTi  effort 
in  duplication  of  plants  and  machinery,  in  sales  forc€«, 
advertising  and  other  unproductive  factors  of  competitive 
warfare.  Work  is  unregulated  and  uncertain,  periods  of 
strenuous  and  taxing  activity  alternating  with  seasons  of 
enforced  idleness.  The  planless  and  casual  mode  of  produc- 
tion often  results  either  in  a  scarcity  or  in  a  superabun- 
dance of  supplies. 

In  the  former  case  the  price  of  products  rises  to  a 
point  which  puts  them  beyond  the  reach  of  the  needy  con- 
sumer, and  the  latter  is  apt  to  inflict  on  society  that  most 
fearful  of  capitalist  scourges — the  industrial  crisis. 

When  the  market  is  stocked  with  such  an  excessive 
quantity  of  commodities  that  the  consumers  have  neither 
ability  nor  means  to  absorb  them,  industrial  paralysis  en- 
sues. The  wheels  of  production  cease  to  turn,  the  arteries 
of  trade  are  clogged.  Millions  of  workers  are  thrown  out 
of  employment,  thousands  of  business  enterprises  collapse. 
Men,  women  and  children  succumb  for  want  of  food  and 
clothing,  and  all  the  time  food  and  clothing  are  piled  op  m 
prodigious  quantities,  rotting  for  lack  of  consumers. 

The  competitive  system  of  private  capitalism  erects 
an  unsurmountable  barrier  between  the  workers  and  their 
work,  between  the  people  and  their  food. 

TRUST   RESTRICTION   OF   COMPETITION. 

These  glaring  defects  of  competition  in  manufacture 
and  trade  ultimately  lead  to  its  partial  suppression.     The 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  25 

capitalists  begin  to  organize.  The  individual  merchant  and 
manufacturer  yield  to  the  corporation,  and  the  latter 
rapidly  grows  into  that  most  modern  of  industrial 
phenomena — the  trust.  The  trusts  succeed  in  eliminating 
some  of  the  evils  of  unbridled  competition,  but  they  exact 
a  terrible  price  for  the  service.  With  the  control  of  the 
market  in  each  important  industry  they  acquire  practically 
unrestricted  powers  over  the  workers  as  well  as  the  con- 
sumers, and  they  do  not  hesitate  to  use  and  abuse  these 
powers  to  the  utmost. 

To  the  trusts  furthermore  belongs  the  credit  of  having 
perfected  the  most  pernicious  of  modern  methods  of 
financial  malpractice — the  "watering"  of  stocks.  In  cre- 
ating by  their  mere  fiat  new  income-bearing  "securities"  to 
the  extent  of  billions  of  dollars,  they  impose  a  heavier  tax 
on  the  people  of  this  country  than  the  combined  organs  of 
government  ever  dared  to  exact. 

And  the  nation,  as  at  present  organized,  is  helpless 
before  them.  No  amount  of  denunciation  will  shake  their 
massive  foundation,  no  penal  legislation  or  court  decrees 
will  curtail  their  tremendous  powers,  as  the  sturdy  corpses 
of  the  Standard  Oil  company,  the  Tobacco  Trust  and  other 
"dissolved"  combines  eloquently  attest.  In  the  face  of  pop- 
ular clamor  and  indignation  they  stand  like  huge  giants, 
complacently  grinning  at  the  impotent  ravings  of  excited 
pygmies. 

The  trusts  have  largely  abolished  industrial  anarchy. 
They  have  reared  in  its  place  the  formidable  throne  of  in- 
dustrial autocracy. 

HARVESTING  THE  ANNUAL  PRODUCT. 

The  economic  ascendancy  of  the  capitalists  places  them 
in  a  position  to  apportion  the  annual  product  of  the  country 
among  its  inhabitants.  To  be  sure,  they  do  not  discharge 
that  function  consciously  or  planfully — they  operate  indi- 
rectly, each  within  his  own  sphere;  but  the  collective  result 


26  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

of  the  process  amounts  to  an  effective  division  of  wealth, 
periodically  accomplished  by  the  capitalist  class. 

And  the  plan  upon  which  the  division  proceeds  is  ex- 
ceedingly simple: 

The  working  population  as  a  whole  gets  just  a  little 
less  than  is  necessary  to  maintain  it  in  physical  fitness  for 
its  task  and  to  enable  it  to  reproduce  the  species  worker. 

The  balance  is  retained  by  the  capitalist  purveyors  as 
their  just  share  of  the  "national"  wealth. 

It  is  this  method  of  wealth  distribution  which  rears  our 
thousands  of  powerful  millionaires,  with  their  proud  man- 
sions and  dazzling  luxury,  and  it  is  this  method  also  that 
breeds  our  millions  of  paupers  with  their  disreputable 
dwellings,  their  filth  and  rags.  To  this  capitalist  system  of 
wealth  distribution  we  are  largely  indebted  for  our 
libraries,  our  hospitals,  rescue  missions  and  charitable  in- 
stitutions of  all  descriptions;  also  for  our  pauperism,  child 
labor,  trade  diseases,  white  slavery  and  many  other  forms 
of  destitution  and  its  twin  sisters,  crime  and  vice. 

RESTRICTION   OF   EDUCATION. 

The  monopoly  of  material  wealth  inevitably  involves  a 
corresponding  monopoly  in  education  and  culture.  If  the 
degree  of  civilization  attained  by  a  community  is  to  be 
measured  not  by  the  heights  of  accomplishment  reached  by 
the  few,  but  by  the  general  diffusion  of  culture  among  the 
masses,  then  indeed  our  modern  civilization  is  a  miserable 
failure. 

The  large  masses  of  the  people  participate  to  some 
extent  in  the  benefits  of  the  practical  achievements  of  mod- 
em science,  but  the  general  cultural  influences  of  the  mar- 
velous scientific  discoveries  of  recent  times  pass  by  them 
with  little  effect.  Millions  of  mine  workers,  factory  hands 
and  street  laborers  culturally  still  live  in  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, and  as  to  the  fine  arts,  the  drama,  literature,  music, 
painting  and  sculpture  and  all  the  things  that  go  so  far  to- 
ward ennobling  and  embellishing  the  life  of  the  individual 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  27 

they  simply  do  not  exist  for  the  vast  majority  of  the  people, 
who  have  neither  means  nor  leisure  to  cultivate  them. 

But  the  most  disastrous  effect  of  the  system  of  private 
capitalistic  industries  is  the  division  of  the  population  into 
distinct  social  and  economic  groups  with  conflicting  and 
hostile  interests.  The  prevailing  system  of  industrial  own- 
ership and  operation  arrays  the  producer  against  the  con- 
sumer, the  tenant  against  the  landlord  and  the  worker 
against  the  employer. 

THE  CLASS  WAR. 

Most  far  reaching  in  social  consequences  is  the  war 
between  the  latter  two  classes.  For  there  is  war,  and  noth- 
ing but  war,  between  the  capitalist  and  the  worker,  in  spite 
of  the  conventional  cant  about  the  alleged  harmony  of  their 
economic  interests.  The  capitalists'  profits  stand  in  inverse 
ratio  to  the  workers'  wages  and  vice  versa.  So  long  as  the 
industries  of  the  country  are  operated  for  the  private  ad- 
vantage of  the  individual  capitalist,  so  long  will  the  latter 
strive  to  secure  the  maximum  of  work  for  the  minimum  of 
pay ;  and  so  long  as  human  labor  remains  a  mere  commodity 
to  be  sold  to  the  capitalist  in  open  market,  so  long  will  the 
worker  strive  to  save  and  conserve  this,  his  sole  valuable 
possession,  and  to  obtain  as  large  a  price  for  it  as  he  can. 

There  is  no  more  harmony  between  privately  owned 
capital  and  wage-earning  labor  than  there  is  between  the 
wolf  and  the  lamb.  The  modern  capitalist  extracts  his 
profits  by  dint  of  this  economic  power,  the  ownership  of  the 
tools  of  work.  The  modern  toiler  does  his  share  of  the 
world's  work  under  protest.  When  he  does  not  strike  or 
boycott  or  destroy  his  employer's  property,  he  renders  his 
services  grudgingly.  Instinctively  he  hates  his  employer, 
for  he  feels  that  the  latter  is  robbing  him  of  a  large  por- 
tion of  his  legitimate  product  by  means  of  an  artificial 
social  arrangement. 


28  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

AN  ENDURING  STRUGGLE. 

The  employer  feels  and  fears  that  hatred,  and  is  always 
on  the  watch  for  open  outbreaks  of  the  sentiment,  prepared 
to  quell  the  ever-anticipated  revolts  of  his  "hands"  by  a 
course  of  starvation,  enforced,  if  need  be,  by  the  clubs  of 
the  police,  the  rifles  of  the  militia  or  by  court  injunctions. 
"Industrial  disputes"  are  not  the  exception,  they  are  almost 
the  rule,  in  the  relations  of  employer  and  employe.  Our 
industrial  derangement,  miscalled  "system,"  operates 
through  a  state  of  permanent  industrial  warfare,  in  which 
the  true  producers  of  all  wealth  are  treated  as  prisoners 
of  war. 

This  general  and  relentless  social  strife  is  not  fomented 
by  malevolent  "agitators."  It  is  rooted  in  the  very  founda- 
tions of  the  system  of  capitalism  and  is  the  most  damning 
Indictment  against  it. 

CAPITALIST  DOMINATION  OF  THE  STATE. 

Nor  are  the  direct  economic  faults  of  the  existing  order 
its  only  or  even  greatest  curse.  The  diseased  germs  of 
the  sj^stem  are  bound  to  infect  all  organs  of  the  body 
politic  with  their  insidious  poison.  For,  after  all,  modern 
politics  is  mainly  concerned  with  affairs  of  business  within 
the  municipality,  state  and  nation.  Franchises  and  grants 
for  public-service  corporations,  tariffs  for  manufacturing 
industries,  supervision  of  certain  quasi-public  business 
concerns,  regulation  of  rates  and  charges  of  others,  and 
rules  with  respect  to  certain  employments — these  constitute 
the  largest  items  on  the  calendar  of  every  legislative  body, 
and  all  such  legislation  has  a  direct  effect  on  the  capitalist's 
ledger. 

The  capitalists  are  likewise  vitally  concerned  in  the 
personnel  of  the  executive  and  judicial  officials.  The  favors 
or  disfavors  of  such  officials  often  mean  dollars  and  cents 
to  them.  The  big  business  interests  have  thus  a  direct  and 
practical  motive  in  seeking  to  influence  or  control  politics. 
And  therein  lies  the  main  cause  of  all  contemporary  political 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  29 

corruption.  The  national  campaigns  of  the  old  political 
parties  are  financed,  hence  controlled,  very  largely  by  the 
national  trusts  through  their  individual  representatives; 
the  state  campaigns  by  the  principal  railroad  lines  of  the 
state;  and  the  municipal  campaigns  by  the  local  traction, 
gas  or  other  "public-service"  corporations. 

THE  CORRUPTION   OF   POLITICS. 

Under  these  conditions  politics  becomes  a  lucrative 
calling  exercised  by  a  large  army  of  professionals,  trained 
in  the  fine  art  of  trafficking  in  votes,  public  offices  and  legis- 
lative enactments.  The  Spartan  band  of  our  honest  but 
simple  statesmen  may  continue  exerting  their  ingenuity 
toward  the  elaboration  of  an  ideal  Corrupt  Practices  Act 
and  perfect  primary  laws,  and  our  public-spirited  municipal 
reformers  may  remain  on  their  life-job  of  purifying  local 
politics;  they  may  even  succeed  in  curbing  the  raw  methods 
of  open  barter  and  in  introducing  greater  outward  decency ; 
but  they  cannot  change  the  substance. 

So  long  as  politics  has  a  direct  bearing  on  private 
profits,  there  will  always  exist  a  commercial  alliance  between 
the  capitalist  and  the  politician,  the  former  having  a  con- 
stant incentive  to  corrupt  and  the  latter  being  in  the  busi- 
ness of  being  corrupted. 

And  what  is  true  of  politics  holds  equally  good  of  the 
effects  of  capitalism  on  all  fields  of  the  intellectual  and 
spiritual  life  of  the  nation. 

The  general  state  of  public  enlightenment  in  the  last 
analysis  determines  all  social  and  political  developments  of 
the  country. 

GOVERNMENT  BY  A  SMALL  MINORITY. 

The  natural  and  direct  impulse  of  every  individual  or 
group  or  class  of  individuals  is  to  act  in  a  manner  mqst 
conducive  to  the  promotion  of  his  or  their  interests.  But  in 
order  to  make  the  action  effective,  the  interests  must  be 
intelligently   understood.     If   the   majority   of   the   people 


30  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

clearly  perceived  their  needs  and  rights,  and  realized  their 
power,  no  minority  would  ever  rule.  The  fact  that  all  ruling 
classes  in  history  have  been  in  the  minority  is  to  be  largely 
accounted  for  by  their  ability  to  impose  on  the  rest  of  the 
population  such  views  and  notions  as  were  required  to  pre- 
serve their  rule. 

Not  that  the  rule  of  any  dominant  class  was  ever  based 
on  purely  intellectual  concepts — on  the  contrary,  they  were 
always  supported  by  brute  physical  force  in  the  shape  of 
strong  armies;  but  nevertheless  they  depended  ultimately 
on  popular  sanction.  In  the  absence  of  such  sanction  the 
ruling  classes  could  not  even  recruit  and  maintain  their 
armies  in  the  long  run. 

The  capitalists  are  no  exception  to  this  general  his- 
torical rule.  They  constitute  a  minority  in  the  population 
of  every  civilized  country.  Their  rule  is  based  on  their 
ownership  of  the  tools  of  work,  the  laws  which  sanction  and 
protect  such  ownership,  and  the  government  organized  to 
enforce  such  sanction  and  protection.  But  in  a  political 
democracy  the  laws  may  change  with  every  change  of  the 
popular  notion  of  justice  and  expediency,  and  the  govern- 
ment is  always  the  football  of  contending  forces  of  diverse 
material  interests.  To  preserve  their  economic  power  the 
capitalists  must  therefore  retain  their  political  control,  and 
the  latter  presupposes  the  support  of  a  majority  of  the 
people. 

CONTROLLING  THE  AGENCIES  OF  THE  POPULAR  WILL. 

Modern  capitalism  depends  on  popular  sanction  even 
in  a  larger  measure  than  the  class  rules  of  the  past,  because 
that  sanction  must  be  renewed  and  solemnly  attested  every 
few  years  at  the  ballot  box. 

The  capitalists  are  thus  vitally  concerned  in  the  state 
of  enlightenment,  social  views,  economic  doctrines  and  ethi- 
cal conceptions  of  their  fellow-citizens,  and  they  spare  no  ef- 
fort to  shape  them  in  conformity  with  their  own  notions  and 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  31 

interests.    The  press,  the  pulpit  and  the  school  are  largely 
under  their  influence,  if  not  directly  in  their  service. 

The  most  influential  part  of  the  daily  press  is  either 
owned  outright  by  them,  or  mortgaged  to  them,  or  de- 
pendent on  them  through  advertisements  and  similar  bonds 
of  friendship,  and  the  average  editorial  writer  quite  nat- 
urally views  the  world  and  its  problems  through  the  colored 
spectacles  of  his  masters. 

The  churches,  especially  the  larger  and  wealthier,  are 
also  supported  by  the  money  interests,  and  their  ministei's    4^ 
in  most  cases  quite  innocently  and  sincerely  deliver  the 
message  of   Christ   in  the  version   of  the  factory   super- 
intendent. 

.  The  public  schools  suffer  from  the  same  malign  politi- 
cal influences  which  corrupt  the  city  councils,  and  the  col- 
leges and  universities  are  often  founded,  endowed  or  sup- 
ported by  benevolent  capitalists  on  the  tacit  condition  that 
science  is  at  all  times  to  remain  respectable  and  respectful. 

The  existence  of  an  "independent"  press  and  the  occa- 
sional type  of  the  progressive  preacher  and  the  radical 
college  professor  only  prove  that  exceptionally  vigorous 
spirits  may  assert  themselves  in  spite  of  the  corrupting 
influences  of  capitalist  economic  pressure.  They  justify 
the  hope  of  Socialism,  but  do  not  mitigate  the  evils  of  capi- 
talism.  ... 

EVILS  FLOW  FROM  A  COMMON  SOURCE. 

It  seems  to  me  quite  clear  that  so  long  as  the  sources 
of  popular  knowledge  and  faith  and  the  organs  of  public 
expression  are  monopolized  by  private  capitalist  interests, 
so  long  will  they  serve  the  same  purpose  as  the  privately 
owned  tools  of  production — to  fortify  the  capitalist  rule. 

Thus  the  most  .serious  defects  in  our  scheme  of  social 
arrangement  may  be  readily  traced  to  one  common  source — 
the  system  which  hands  over  to  a  relatively  small  number 
of  favored  individuals  the  very  key  to  the  life  and  welfare 
of  the  whole  people,  the  sources  of  life  and  the  tools  of  work. 


32  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

and  allows  them  to  monopolize  wealth,  power,  ease  and  cul- 
ture, leaving  the  majority  of  their  fellowmen  to  struggle 
in  poverty,  dependence,  toil  and  ignorance — the  anarchistic, 
predatory,  demoralizing  and  corrupting  system  of  cap- 
italism. 

It  is  no  answer  to  the  Socialist  indictment  to  say  that 
with  all  its  shortcomings  modern  civilization  is  superior  to 
all  conditions  of  the  past. 

The  modern  or  capitalist  era  has  introduced  certain 
grave  social  problems  unknown  to  the  past.  It  has  increased 
the  risks  and  the  insecurity  of  the  working  population,  it 
has  intensified  social  contrasts  and  has  reared  a  new  social 
power  of  unprecedented  virulence  and  menace,  the  rrjoney 
power.  But  with  all  that  the  Socialists  cheerfully  admit 
that,  on  the  whole,  life  is  more  propitious  today  even  to  the 
masses  than  it  was  at  any  time  in  the  past.  The  very 
foundation  of  their  optimistic  philosophy  rests  on  the  real- 
ization of  the  world's  never  ceasing  process  of  betterment.* 


THE  OUTCOME. 

The  culmination  of  the  Socialist  theory  of  social  evolution 
is  the  reasoned  prediction  that  the  capitalist  system  will  be 
supplanted  by  a  system  of  co-operative  ownership  and  opera- 
tion. Nevertheless,  there  are  diverse  views  as  to  how  this 
change  may  come — whether  as  a  breakdown,  like  the  collapse 
of  a  worn-out  machine,  and  the  substitution  of  a  new  social 
mechanism,  or  by  the  gradual  alteration  of  one  after  one  of 
its  institutions  and  constituent  parts  until  the  whole  has  been 
transformed.  There  are,  no  less,  diverse  views  as  to  the  lead- 
ing factors  making  for  this  change.  The  following  passage 
portraying  the  outcome  is  by  one  of  the  popular  interpreters 
of  Marx: 

BY    LOUIS    B.    BOUDIX. 

The  breakdown  of  the  capitalistic  system  of  production 
leading  to  social  revolution  will  be  brought  about  by  the 

'"Socialism:    Promise  or  Menace?"  pp.   15-25. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  33 

inherent  contradictions  of  the  capitalistic  system  of  pro- 
duction itself. 

The  laws  which  govern  the  capitalistic  form  of  produc- 
tion will  ultimately  lead  to  the  extinction  of  the  middle 
strata  of  society  as  independent,  property-owning,  classes 
and  divide  society  into  two  classes :  the  very  small  minority 
owning  all  the  wealth  of  society,  and  the  large  mass  of  the 
people,  the  working  class,  who  own  nothing,  not  even  their 
own  bodies  if  they  want  to  keep  from  starvation.  At  the 
sam.e  time  the  development  of  machinery  will  continue  to 
throw  more  and  more  workingmen  out  of  employment  and 
make  the  share  of  those  workingmen  who  are  employed  in 
the  product  produced  by  them  continually  smaller. 

The  productive  forces  of  society  will  not  only  become 
fettered,  so  that  they  will  largely  have  to  remain  idle,  but 
even  that  portion  which  will  not  remain  in  enforced  idle- 
ness will  be  able  to  produce  only  with  tremendous  accom- 
panying waste  and  convulsive  interruptions,  until  finally, 
a  point  will  be  reached  when,  by  the  very  conditions  of  cap- 
italistic production,  because  of  the  large  portion  of  the 
working  class  out  of  employment  and  the  small  share  of  the 
goods  produced  by  them  received  by  the  employed  working- 
men  in  return  for  their  labor,  there  will  accumulate  such  an 
enormous  mass  of  goods  which  the  capitalists  will  be  unable 
to  dispose  of,  that  is  to  say,  find  a  market  for,  that  produc- 
tion will  have  to  be  indefinitely  suspended,  unless  a  new 
basis  of  production  be  found. 

THE  MISSION  OF  THE  WORKING  CLASS. 

Meanwhile  the  discontent  of  the  working  class  has  been 
growing,  and  the  sense  of  the  injustice  done  to  it  accumu- 
lating. It  has  developed  a  code  of  ethics  of  its  own.  Hav- 
ing no  property  themselves,  the  workingmen  have  lost  all 
sense  of  the  sacredness  of  private  property.  Most  property 
being  owned  by  corporations  having  "no  body  to  be  kicked 
and  no  soul  to  be  damned,"  they  fail  to  see  the  necessity  of 
private   ownership   or   the   usefulness    of   private   owners. 


34  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

They  have  nothing  to  lose,  and  they  have  grown  bold.  They 
have  forgotten  their  duties  to  their  families,  for  which  they 
can  do  nothing  and  which  are,  for  the  most  part,  their  inde- 
pendent co-workers  instead  of  dependents,  but  their  sense 
of  duty  to  their  class  has  been  constantly  growing  upon 
them  during  the  long  period  of  struggle  preceding  the  final 
encounter. 

The  working  class  has  been  organized  by  the  very  proc- 
ess of  capitalistic  production  and  exploitation.  It  has  been 
educated  to  understand  its  own  powers  and  possibilities.  It 
is  animated  by  the  world-historic  mission  devolved  upon  it. 
It  contains  within  its  own  ranks  all  the  elements  necessary 
for  conducting  the  production  of  society  on  a  higher  plane, 
so  as  to  utilize  all  the  productive  powers  of  society.  The 
mechanical  development  of  productive  forces  requires  pro- 
duction on  a  large  co-operative  basis.  The  working  class 
takes  possession  of  the  social  machinery,  and  the  real  his- 
tory of  human  society  begins — the  co-operative  common- 
wealth.* 


*"The  Theoretical  System  of  Karl  Marx,"  pp.  18-19. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  35 

IV. 

A  SYSTEM  OF  POLITICAL  ECONOMY. 

Socialism  in  the  sense  of  a  system  of  political  economy  is 
concerned  with  the  laws  and  processes  of  modern  industry.  It 
'  is  an  analysis  and  an  explanation  of  the  methods  of  producing 
and  distributing,  by  wage  labor,  goods  for  sale.  As  in  the 
case  of  the  Socialist  theory  of  social  evolution,  so  also  in  that 
of  Socialist  political  economy,  the  originator  was  Karl  Marx. 
Socialists  do  not,  however,  hold  Marx  to  have  been  infallible, 
any  more  than  scientists  hold  Darwin  to  have  been  infallible. 
"Marxism,"  says  Hillquit,  "is  a  living,  progressive  theory  of  a 
live,  growing  and  concrete  social  movement,  not  an  ossified 
dogma  nor  a  final  revelation.  And  the  disciples  of  Marx  have 
always  shown  a  true  appreciation  of  the  spirit  of  their  master 
by  developing,  extending  and,  when  necessary  in  the  light  of 
newer  developments,  even  modifying  his  teachings."  The  course 
of  capitalism  has  altered  somewhat  since  Marx's  time,  and  new 
interpretations  have  been  rendered  necessary.  Nevertheless, 
the  groundwork  of  Socialist  theory  remains  Marxian. 

As  a  part  of  the  subject  matter  of  this  section  will  be  more 
fully  treated  in  the  following  pamphlet,  "The  Science  of  So- 
cialism," no  more  than  a  concise  summary  will  be  given  here. 

CAPITALISM. 

To  comprehend  Socialist  political  economy,  it  is  first  nec- 
essary to  understand  the  meaning  given  by  Socialists  to  the 
fundamental  terms,  such  as  "capitalism,"  "capital,"  "commod- 
ity," "use  value,"  "exchange  value,"  "surplus  value,"  "profit," 
"price"  and  "labor-power." 

By  capitalism  is  meant  that  system  or  stage  of  society  in 
which  the  greater  part  of  production  is  carried  on  by  employers, 
who  use  an  accumulated  stock  of  wealth  to  acquire  machinery 
and  raw  materials  and  to  hire  labor  to  produce  goods  for  sale 
at  a  profit.  The  system  of  capitalism  is  extremely  modern. 
Though  it  had  its  origins  in  the  break-up  of  feudalism,  not 
until  toward  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century,  when  steam  was 
applied  to  factory  operation,  did  it  become  powerful,  and  not 
until  within  the  last  50  years  has  it  become  generally  pre- 
dominant. Its  distinguishing  character  is  the  production,  by 
wage  labor,  of  articles  not  for  the  use  of  the  maker,  but  for 
sale  in  the  markets.    Says  Boudin: 

The  distinctive  feature  of  capitalist  production,  that 


36  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

which  gives  it  its  character,  is  that  under  this  system  man 
does  not  produce  goods  but  commodities,  that  is,  "wares 
and  merchandise."  In  other  words,  he  does  not  produce 
things  which  he  wants  to  use  himself,  and  because  he  wants 
to  use  them  to  satisfy  some  want  of  his,  but  things  which 
he  does  not  want  to  use  himself  but  which  can  be  disposed 
of  by  him  to  others,  caring  nothing  whether  and  in  what 
manner  the  others  will  use  them.  Instead  of  producing 
goods  for  his  own  use,  as  people  used  to  do  in  former  days, 
under  other  systems  of  production,  he  produces  commodities 
for  the  market.  Marx,  therefore,  begins  his  great  investi- 
gation of  the  capitalist  mode  of  production  with  the  follow- 
ing words:  "The  wealth  of  those  societies  in  which  the 
capitalist  mode  of  production  prevails,  presents  itself  as  an 
immense  accumulation  of  commodities,  its  unit  being  a 
single  commodity."-^ 

CAPITAL. 

Capital  is  said  by  Ernest  Untermann  to  be  an  "economic 
relationship,"  and  by  Spargo  to  be  a  "social  relation."  The 
meaning  is  that  wealth  used  in  production  becomes  capital 
only  under  certain  conditions.  It  is  perhaps  better,  for 
present  purposes,  to  make  the  definition  less  abstract 
and  to  say  that  capita]  is.M£cumiilated  wealth  use^ 
medium  of  wage  labor  to  produce  further  wealth.  In  the  words 
of  Untermann: 

Land  may  be  capital.  Tools  may  be  capital.  Articles 
of  consumption  and  raw  materials  may  be  capital. 

But  none  of  these  things  are  capital,  unless  they  are 
stamped  with  the  typical  mark  of  capital.  That  mark  is 
that  these  things  must  be  means  to  rob  the  laborer  of  the 
products  of  his  toil.  Labor  and  labor-power  can  never  be 
capital  in  the  hands  of  the  laborer.  So  long  as  the  relation- 
ship of  capital  and  labor  exists,  labor  is  always  the  exploited 
part.   ... 

The  things  used  as  capital  are  not  in  themselves  capi- 


*"The  Theoretical   System  of  Karl   Marx,"  p.  54. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  37 

tal.  They  may  become  capital  only  under  certain  very  defi- 
nite social  conditions,  under  which  different  economic 
classes  struggle  for  the  control  of  the  products  of  labor. 
.  .  .  The  exploitation  of  the  labor  of  the  working 
classes  ...  is  the  source  of  capital.  But  the  source  alone 
is  not  enough  to  impress  a  thing  with  the  trade-mark  of 
capital.  Something  else  is  needed.  There  may  have  been 
epochs  in  which  the  working  classes  were  exploited  and  yet 
they  were  not  exploited  by  capital. 

This  other  requirement  is  trade.  The  products  of  labor 
must  be  sold  at  a  profit,  in  order  that  the  means  of  exploita- 
tion may  assume  the  character  of  capital.- 

THE  COMMODITY   AND   ITS   VALUE. 

Since  an  analysis  of  capitalist  production  must  depend  upon 
ascertaining  the  nature  of  a  commodity,  a  definition  of  that  arti- 
cle will  be  given  first;  and  since  use  value  and  exchange  value  are 
integral  attributes  of  a  commodity,  these  terms  must  also  be 
explained  in  the  definition.    In  the  words  of  Joseph  E.  Cohen: 

A  commodity  is  something  bought  and  sold.  It  is  an 
article  that  satisfies  some  human  want  or  fancy.  It  is  a 
product  of  labor.  But  while  every  commodity  is  a  product 
of  labor,  every  product  of  labor  is  not  a  commodity. 

Every  product  of  labor  that  serves  a  useful  purpose 
has  use  value.  Yet  a  thing  may  be  very  useful  to  the  man 
who  makes  it,  such  as  the  raft  of  the  backwoodsman,  and 
not  be  a  commodity. 

To  be  a  commodity,  a  product  of  labor  must  bring  a 
price  upon  the  market.  It  must  be  a  common  object  of 
trade  and  produced  with  the  end  in  view  of  being  exchanged 
for  money — of  being  sold.  In  addition  to  having  use  value, 
to  be  a  commodity  it  must  possess  exchange  value. 

Use  value  may  be  a  personal  affair ;  exchange  value  is  a 
social  relation. 

It  is  the  possession  of  exchange  value  that  turns  a  labor 
product  into  a  commodity.    Under  all  systems  of  production 


""Marxian   Economics,"   pp.   28-29. 


38  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

articles  are  produced  for  their  use  value.  It  is  the  par- 
ticular production  of  exchange  values,  or  commodities,  that 
distinguishes  capitalism  from  feudalism,  chattel  slavery 
and  primitive  communism.- 


,( 


LABOR  AND  LABOR-POWER. 

The  most  significant  commodity  on  the  capitalist  mar- 
et  is  the  labor-power  of  the  wage-worker,  that  is,  the  brain 
and  muscle  power  of  those  who  have  no  other  means  of  ex- 
istence but  the  sale  of  their  power,  of  their  own  bodies,  to 
some  master  for  a  stipulated  sum.  What  the  laborer  sells 
to  the  capitalist  is  not  labor;  but  the  commodity,  labor- 
power,  is  bought  by  the  capitalist  for  the  purpose  of  being 
consumed  by  him.  He  buys  it  at  its  market  price,  as  he 
does  all  other  commodities,  and  consumes  it  by  putting  it  to 
work  for  his  own  benefit.   .    .    . 

I  Labor-power  has  one  quality  by  which  it  differs  from  ' 
all  other  commodities.  When  it  is  productively  consumed 
by  the  capitalist  it  does  not  merely  produce  other  com- 
modities, but  it  reproduces  itself.  A  part  of  its  product 
passes  into  the  hands  of  the  capitalist,  is  taken  to  the  mar- 
ket and  sold,  and  the  money  received  for  it  is  used  to  buy 
new  raw  materials,  machinery,  labor-power,  and  to  pay 
the  individual  expenses  of  the  capitalist.  That  portion 
which  is  spent  for  the  purchase  of  labor-power  passes  into 
the  hands  of  the  laborer  as  wages  and  is  used  by  him  for 
the  reproduction  and  conservation  of  his  labor-power.  The 
laborer  buys  with  his  wages  necessities  of  life,  builds  up 
new  labor-power  and  offers  it  again  to  the  same  or  to  some 
other  capitalist  for  renewed  productive  consumption.*'* 

LABOR  THE  SOURCE  OF  VALUE. 

In  the  exchange  of  commodities  the  very  fact  of  an 
equation  shows  that  there  exists  in  each  commodity  some- 


*"Socialism  for  Students,"  p.  33. 

**Untermann:      "Marxian    Economics,"   pp.    169-170. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  39 

thing  common  to  all;  all  such  commodities  can  be  reduced 
to  a  common  factor.  This  common  factor  is,  evidently,  not 
a  natural  property  of  products,  but  something  which  natural 
products  have  acquired,  thus  making  them  commodities. 
Now,  what  is  it  that,  applied  to  these  natural  products  | 
gives  them  value?    The  answer  is  human  labor.  ...  i 

Capital,  of  course,  is  used  by  labor  in  the  production 
of  value,  and  that  part  which  is  consumed  passes  over  and 
is  embodied  in  the  new  product.  While  labor  uses  capital  in 
production  of  values,  capital  is  not  the  source  of  value; 
.labor  alone  is  the  source  and  creator  of  all  value.  When 
we  say  that  labor  creates  all  value,  it  is  not  meant  that  land 
and  capital  are  not  factors  of  production,  but  that  labor 
alone  is  the  active  factor,  the  others  being  passive.   .    .    . 

We  need  to  keep  constantly  in  mind  that  the  labor 
which  is  implied  is  social  labor — the  labor-time  socially 
necessary.  It  is  not  individual  or  concrete  labor  that  meas- 
ures value,  but  the  social  or  abstract  labor.   .    .    . 

Value^  then,  means  labor-worth.  It  is  "value  in  labor" 
or  "value  in  exertion,"  and  is  determined  by  the  quantity 
of  abstract  human  labor.  It  is  measured  by  the  average 
labor-time  requisite  to  produce  a  commodity  under  average 
conditions  and  with  average  efficiency  on  the  part  of  labor. 
The  value  of  any  commodity,  then,  is  determined  by  the 
quantity  of  abstract  human  labor  embodied  in  it,  or  required  [ 
for  its  production  or  reproduction.* 


VALUE  AND  PRICE. 

We  may  speak  of  use  value,  or  utility,  by  which  we  mean 
"the  power  which  any  article  possesses  to  satisfy  some  human 
want  or  desire."  And  we  may  speak  of  exchange  value,  or  sim- 
ply value,  by  which  we  mean  "the  power  which  any  commodity 
possesses  of  commanding  in  exchange  some  definite  quantity 
of  any  other  commodity."  We  speak  of  price  more  often  than 
of  value,  and  with  most  persons  the  terms  are   used   almost 


*  Charles  H.  Vail:    "Principles  of  Scientific  Socialism,"  pp.  35-50. 


40  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

interchangeably.     They  have,  however,  a  marked  difference  of 
meaning.    In  the  words  of  Boudin: 

We  must  not,  however,  confound  price  with  value. 
Value  is  something  which  the  commodity  possesses  when 
placed  upon  the  market  and  before  any  price  is  paid  for  it, 
and  it  is  because  of  this  value  that  the  price  is  paid  for  it. 
The  value  is  the  cause  of  the  price.  Furthermore,  value  and 
price  do  not  always  coincide  in  amount.  The  price  of  an 
article  may  be  greater  or  less  than  its  value,  according  to 
circumstances.  The  proof  of  this  is  the  fact  that  things 
may  be  bought  "cheap"  or  "dear,"  that  is  to  say,  for  a  price 
above  or  below  their  value.  If  the  price  of  a  thing  and  its 
value  were  the  same,  nothing  could  be  bought  either  cheap 
or  dear,  because  the  price  paid  would  be  its  value.  .    .   . 

Value  is  the  norm  about  which  the  "haggling"  of  the 
market  takes  place,  and  the  price  which  results  from  this 
"haggling"  naturally  gravitates  towards  its  norm  value. 
Price  will  be  "cheap"  or  "dear"  according  to  whether  it  is, 
in  the  estimation  of  the  person  making  the  valuation,  below 
or  above  the  actual  value  of  the  thing." 

SURPLUS  VALUE. 

^s  the  theory  that  labor  is  the  source  of  value  is  the 
foundation  of  Socialist  political  economy,  so  its  culmination  is 
the  theory  that  the  wealth  of  the  capitalist  class  consists  of 
the  surplus  value  extorted  from  the  workers.  Roughly  speak- 
ing, this  surplus  value  is  the  difference  between  the  wages  re- 
ceived by  the  workers  and  the  value  created  by  them  in  pro- 
duction.    It  is  further  explained  by  Charles  H.  Vail  as  follows: 

Surplus  value  is  created  ...  in  buying  and  selling 
labor-power — buying  it  at  its  market  value  and  selling  it 
at  its  use  value.  Surplus  value  is  the  difference  between 
the  value  of  labor-power  and  the  value  of  labor's  product — 
between  what  labor  creates  and  what  it  receives.   .    .    . 

The  distinction  between  the  process  of  producing  value 
and  the  process  of  producing  surplus  value  is  in  the  exten- 


"The  Theoretical  System  of  Karl  Marx,"  pp.  66-67. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  41 

sion  of  the  latter  beyond  the  former.  If  the  labor-power 
expended  does  not  exceed  the  value  advanced  by  the  capital- 
ist (wages)  for  the  labor-power  .  .  .  then  only  value  is 
produced.  But  if  the  process  is  extended  beyond  that  point, 
the  value  created  in  excess  becomes  surplus  value.  The 
laborer  is  obliged  to  work  during  a  portion  of  the  day  to 
produce  the  value  of  his  labor-power — the  value  of  his 
means  of  subsistence. 

There  are  two  ways  in  which  surplus  value  can  be  pro- 
duced. One  method  ...  is  that  of  the  prolongation  of  the 
working  day  beyond  the  time  necessary  to  produce  an 
equivalent  for  the  value  paid  by  the  capitalist  for  the  labor- 
power.  But  another  method  of  accomplishing  the  same 
result  is  to  shorten  the  time  of  the  necessary  labor.  This 
adds  to  the  surplus  labor  that  which  is  taken  from  the 
necessary  labor.  The  former  is  called  "absolute  surplus 
value,"  and  the  latter  "relative  surplus  value."  In  order  to 
create  relative  surplus  value  there  must  be  an  increase  in 
the  productiveness  of  labor,  so  that  the  means  of  sub- 
sistence, which  determines  the  value  of  labor-power — will 
be  decreased — so  that  an  equivalent  for  the  wages  is  pro- 
duced in  less  time.  This  is  the  whole  purpose  of  capitalist 
production — to  increase  the  productiveness  of  labor  and  so 
decrease  that  portion  of  the  day  during  which  the  laborer 
must  work  for  his  own  benefit.  The  greater  the  productiv- 
ity of  labor,  the  less  the  value  of  the  commodities,  and  also 
of  labor  power  which  depends  on  the  value  of  the  com- 
modities." 


•"Principles   of  Scientilic  Socialism,"  pp.  60-61. 


42  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

V. 

AN  ORGANIZED  INTERNATIONAL  MOVEMENT. 

As  the  Socialist  movement  from  its  origin  to  the  present 
time  will  be  fully  treated  in  a  succeeding  pamphlet  (No.  Ill, 
"Socialism:  A  Historical  Sketch")  only  the  briefest  mention 
can  be  given  to  it  here.  The  following  passage  is  from  Mr. 
Hillquit's  "Socialism:  Promise  or  Menace?"  pp.  3-4, 

Like  all  other  .  .  .  practical  mass  movements,  Social- 
ism produces  certain  divergent  schools,  bastard  offshoots 
clustering  around  the  main  trunk  of  the  tree,  large  in 
number  and  variety,  but  insignificant  in  size  and  strength. 
Thus  we  hear  of  State  Socialism,  Socialism  of  the  Chair, 
Christian  Socialism  and  even  Catholic  Socialism  .  .  .  their 
chief  function  is  to  confuse  the  minds  of  the  unwary  critics 
of  Socialism;  but  they  have  no  part  in  the  real  life  and  de- 
velopment of  the  active  Socialist  movement. 

The  Socialism  that  counts  ...  is  that  represented 
by  the  politically  organized  movement.  This  numbers  its 
adherents  by  tens  of  millions,  while  the  followers  of  all  its 
secondary  forms  and  variations  in  all  countries  are  prob- 
ably well  within  the  hundred  thousand  mark. 

The  modern  political  movement  of  Socialism  is  world- 
wide in  scope  and  is  definite  and  uniform  in  conception  and 
methods.  The  international  Socialist  movement  consists  of 
a  chain  of  organizations  or  parties,  rarely  more  than  one  in 
each  country.  These  parties  meet  at  regular  intervals  in 
convention  to  discuss  principles,  tactics  and  policies.  The 
platforms,  resolutions  and  constitutions  adopted  at  such 
conventions  are  the  supreme  expression  of  the  organized 
movement.  Barring  variations  in  phraseology,  and  allowing 
for  differences  of  conditions  and  issues  confronting  the 
movement  at  different  times  and  places,  the  declarations 
are  practically  identical  in  all  cases.  The  dominant  Social- 
ist organizations  of  all  countries  are  organically  allied  with 
one  another.    By  means  of  an  International  Socialist  Bureau 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  43 

suppported  at  joint  expense,  the  Socialist  parties  of  the 
world  maintain  uninterrupted  relations  with  one  another, 
and  every  three  years  they  meet  in  international  conven- 
tions, whose  conclusions  are  accepted  by  all  constituent 
national  organizations. 


44  A-ppeal  Socialist  Classics 

VI. 

A  SOCIAL  IDEAL. 
S0CL4LISM  AND  THE  STATE. 

The  persistence  or  dissolution  of  the  state  (that  is,  the 
political  government),  as  that  term  is  now  understood,  under 
Socialism,  is  a  question  that  has  been  widely  discussed.  The 
position  of  Engels  is  well  known.  "The  government  of  per- 
sons," he  wrote,  in  his  "Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific,"  "is 
replaced  by  the  administration  of  things  and  by  the  conduct 
of  processes  of  production.  The  state  is  not  'abolished.*  It  dies 
out."  Socialists  of  later  times,  however,  have  considerably  modi- 
fied this  view.  The  outright  class  character  of  all  states  in 
Engels'  time  may  well  have  been  the  main  factor  in  prompting 
so  sweeping  a  prediction.  The  state,  however,  is  found  to  be 
an  institution  susceptible  of  constant  change  and  even  complete 
transformation  to  serve  other  purposes  than  those  for  which 
it  was  created.  The  following  view,  expressed  by  Mr.  Hillquit, 
is  believed  to  be  the  one  now  most  generally  held  by  Socialists 
throughout  the  world: 

The  modern  state,  originally  the  tool  in  the  hands  of 
the  capitalist  class  for  the  exploitation  of  the  vi^orkers,  is 
gradually  coming  to  be  recognized  by  the  latter  as  a  most 
potent  instrument  for  the  modification  and  ultimate  aboli- 
tion of  the  capitalist  class  rule.  In  the  general  scheme  of 
Socialism,  the  state  has,  therefore,  the  very  important  mis- 
sion of  paving  the  way  for  the  transition  from  present  con- 
ditions to  Socialism.  The  state  in  that  role  is  generally 
styled  in  the  literature  of  Socialism  the  "period  of  transi- 
tion," or  the  "transitional  state."  Beyond  it  lies  the  pure 
Socialist  order. 

Does  that  order  still  admit  of  the  existence  of  a  state, 
or  must  the  state,  as  the  product  of  class  divisions  in  so- 
ciety, fall  with  the  disappearance  of  those  class  divisions  as 
asserted  by  Engels  and  his  followers? 

ADAPTABILITY  OF  INSTITUTIONS. 

At  the  first  glance  the  proposition  seems  almovst 
axiomatic — with  the  removal  of  the  cause,  the  eflfect  must 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  45 

fail.  But  on  closer  analysis  the  question  seems  by  no  means 
free  from  doubt.  A  social  institution  may  be  called  into 
life  by  certain  conditions  and  for  certain  purposes,  but  may 
gradually  adapt  itself  to  new  and  entirely  different  condi- 
tions and  purposes.  In  fact,  the  history  of  our  civilization 
is  replete  with  instances  of  social,  political,  religious  and 
legal  institutions  which  have  long  survived  their  original 
creating  causes,  and  in  an  altered  form  have  shown  great 
vitality  under  new  conditions. 

The  modern  state  exhibits  many  features  that  seem  to 
indicate  just  such  adaptability  and  vitality.  The  state, 
which  came  into  being  solely  as  an  instrument  of  class  re- 
pression, has  gradually,  and  especially  within  the  last  cen- 
turies, assumed  other  important  social  functions,  functions 
in  which  it  largely  represents  society  as  a  whole,  and  not 
any  particular  class  of  it.  Instances  of  such  functions  of 
the  modem  state  may  be  found  in  the  system  of  public 
education,  sanitary  and  health  regulations,  and  in  the  in- 
stitutions of  police  and  criminal  justice  to  the  extent  to 
which  they  secure  the  persona!  safety  and  security  of  all 
citizens.  .   .   . 

FUNCTIONS  OF  THE  SOCIALIST  STATE. 

For  the  purposes  of  public  works,  health,  safety  and 
relief,  the  Socialist  commonwealth  will  need  vast  material 
resources,  probably  more  than  the  modern  state,  and  these 
resources,  in  whatever  form  and  under  whatever  designa- 
tion, can  come  only  from  the  wealth-producing  members  of 
the  commonwealth — thus  there  must  be  a  direct  or  indirect 
tax  on  the  labor  or  income  of  the  citizen.  The  collection  of 
this  tax,  the  direction  of  the  industries  and  the  regulation 
of  the  relations  between  the  citizens,  will  require  some 
laws  and  some  rules  or  instruments  for  their  enforcement; 
hence  even  the  element  of  coercion  cannot  be  entirely  absent 
in  a  Socialist  society,  at  least  not  as  far  as  the  human  mind 
can  at  present  conceive. 

The  Socialist  society  as  conceived  by  modern  Social- 


46  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

ists  differs,  of  course,  very  radically  from  the  modern  state 
in  form  and  substance.    It  is  not  a  class  state,  it  does  noti 
serve  any  part  of  the  population  and  does  not  rule  any  other  | 
part  of  the  population ;  it  represents  the  interests  of  the  \ 
entire  community;  and  it  is  for  the  benefit  of  the  entire 
community  that  it  levies  taxes  and  makes  and  enforces  ^ 
laws.    It  is  not  the  slaveholding  state,  nor  the  feudal  state,  ] 
nor  the  state  of  the  bourgeoisie — it  is  a  Socialist  state,  but 
a   state  nevertheless,   and  since  little  or  nothing  can  be 
gained  by  inventing  a  new  term,  we  shall  hereafter  desig- 
nate the  proposed  organized  Socialist  society  as  the  Social- 
ist state.* 


OUTLINES  OF  THE  SOCIALIST  STATK 

BY  JOHN  SPARGO. 

1. 

It  would  be  absurd,  and  contrary  to  Socialist  principles, 
to  attempt  to  give  detailed  specifications  of  the  Socialist 
state.  There  are,  however,  certain  fundamental  principles 
which  are  essential  to  its  existence.  Without  them,  Social- 
ist society  is  impossible.  If  we  can  take  these  principles 
and  correlate  them,  we  shall  obtain  a  suggestive  outline  of 
the  Socialist  state.  So  far  we  may  safely  proceed  with  full 
scientific  sanction;  beyond  are  the  realms  of  fancy  and 
dreams,  the  Elysian  fields  of  Utopia. 

Society  consists  of  an  aggregation  of  individuals,  but 
it  is  something  more  than  that;  it  is  an  organism,  though 
as  yet  an  imperfectly  developed  one.  While  the  units  of 
which  it  is  composed  have  distinct  and  independent  lives 
within  certain  limits,  they  are,  outside  of  those  limits,  in- 
terdependent and  interrelated.  Man  is  governed  by  two 
great  forces.  Oji  the  one  hand,  he  is  essentially  an  egoist, 
ever  striving  to  individual  freedom;  on  the  other  hand,  he 
is  a  social  animal,  ever  seeking  association  and  avoiding 


"'Socialism    in    Theory    and    Practice,"    pp.    98-100. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  47 

isolation.  This  duality  expresses  itself  in  the  composition 
of  society.  There  is  a  struggle  between  its  members 
motived  by  the  desire  for  individual  expansion ;  and,  along- 
side of  it,  a  sense  of  solidarity,  a  movement  to  mutual, 
reciprocal  relations,  motived  by  the  gregarious  instinct,  i 
All  social  life  is  necessarily  an  oscillation  between  these  \j 
two  motives.  The  social  problem  in  its  last  analysis  is 
nothing  more  than  the  problem  of  combining  and  har- 
monizing social  and  individual  interests  and  actions  spring- 
ing therefrom. 

THE  NOTION  OF  A    SOCIALIST   BUREAUCRACY. 

In  dealing  with  this  social  problem,  the  problem  of  how 
to  secure  harmony  of  social  and  individual  interests  and 
actions,  it  is  necessary  first  of  all  to  recognize  that  both 
the  motives  named  are  equally  important  and  neces- 
sary agents  of  human  progress.  The  idea  largely  prevails 
that  Socialists  ignore  the  individual  motive  and  consider 
only  the  social  motive,  just  as  the  ultra-individualists  have 
erred  in  an  opposite  discrimination. 

The  Socialist  state  has  been  conceived  as  a  great 
bureaucracy.  Mr.  Anstey  gave  humorous  and  vivid  ex- 
pression to  this  idea  in  Punch  some  years  ago,  when  he 
represented  the  citizens  of  the  Socialist  state  as  being  all 
clothed  alike,  known  only  by  numbers,  living  in  barracks, 
strangers  to  all  the  joys  of  family  life,  plodding  through 
their  allotted  tasks  under  a  race  of  hated  bureaucrats,  and 
having  the  solace  of  chewing  gum  in  their  leisure  time  as  a 
specially  paternal  provision.  Some  such  mental  picture 
must  have  inspired  Herbert  Spencer's  "Coming  Slavery," 
and  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  early  forms  of  Socialist 
propaganda  by  pictures  of  imaginary  co-operative  com- 
monwealths afforded  some  excuse  for  the  idea.  Most  in- 
telligent Socialists,  if  called  upon  to  choose  between  them, 
would  probably  prefer  to  live  in  Thibet  under  a  personal 
despotism,  rather  than  under  the  rule  of  the  hierarchies  of 
some  of  these  imaginary  commonwealths  which  Utopian 
Socialists  have  depicted. 


48  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

FREEDOM    THROUGH    MUTUAL    REGULATION. 

jf  The  Socialist  ideal  may  be  said  to  be  a  form  of  social 
organization  in  which  every  individual  will  enjoy  the  great- 
est possible  amount  of  freedom  for  self-development  and 
expression;  and  in  which  social  authority  will  be  reduced 
to  the  minimum  necessary  for  the  preservation  and  insur- 
ance of  that  right  to  all  individuals.  There  is  an  incon- 
■,  testable  right  of  the  individual  to  full  and  free  self -develop- 
ment and  expression.  It  is  not,  however,  an  absolute  right, 
but  is  subject  to  such  restrictions  as  may  be  necessary  to 
safeguard  the  like  right  of  another  individual,  or  of  society 
as  a  whole.  Absolute  personal  liberty  is  not  possible;  to 
grant  it  to  one  individual  would  be  equivalent  to  denying 
it  to  others. 

If,  in  a  certain  community,  a  need  is  commonly  felt 
for  a  system  of  drainage  to  save  the  citizens  from  the  perils 
of  a  possible  outbreak  of  typhoid  or  some  0|J;her  epidemic 
disease,  and  all  the  citizens  agree  upon  a  scheme  except  two 
or  three,  who,  in  the  name  of  personal  liberty,  declare  that 
their  property  must  not  be  touched,  what  is  to  be  done?  If 
the  citizens,  out  of  solicitude  for  the  personal  liberty  of  the 
objecting  individuals,  abandon  or  modify  their  plans,  is  it 
not  clear  that  the  liberty  of  the  many  has  been  sacrificed 
to  the  liberty  of  the  few,  which  is  the  essence  of  tyranny? 
Absolute  individual  liberty  is  incompatible  with  social  lib- 
erty. The  liberty  of  each  must,  in  Mill's  phrase,  be  bounded 
by  the  like  liberty  of  all.  Absolute  personal  liberty  is  a 
chimera,  a  delusion. 

JUSTICE  THE  BASIC  PRINCIPLE. 

The  dual  forces  which  serve  as  the  motives  of  indi- 
vidual and  collective  action  spring,  unquestionably,  from 
the  fact  that  individuals  are  at  once  alike  and  unlike,  equal 
and  unequal.  Alike  in  our  needs  of  certain  fundamental 
necessities,  such  as  food,  clothing,  shelter,  co-operation  for 
producing  these  necessities,  for  protection  from  foes,  human 
and  other,  we  are  unlike  in  tastes,  temperament,  character. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  49 

will  and  so  on,  till  our  diversity  becomes  as  great  and  as 
general  as  our  likeness.  Now,  the  problem  is  to  insure 
equal  opportunities  of  full  development  to  all  these  diversely 
constituted  and  endowed  individuals,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
to  maintain  the  principle  of  equal  obligations  to  society  on 
the  part  of  every  individual.  This  is  the  problem  of  social 
justice:  to  insure  to  each  the  same  social  opportunities,  to 
secure  from  each  a  recognition  of  the  same  obligations  to-\ 
ward  all.  The  basic  principle  of  the  Socialist  state  must! 
be  justice;  no  privileges  or  favors  can  be  extended  to  any! 
individuals  or  groups  of  individuals. 

2. 

Politically,  the  organization  of  the  Socialist  state  must 
be  democratic.  Socialism  without  democracy  is  as  impos- 
sible as  a  shadow  without  light.  The  word  "Socialism"  is  a 
monstrous  misnomer  when  applied  to  schemes  of  paternal- 
ism or  government  ownership  which  lack  the  essential, 
vital  principle  of  democracy.  Justice  requires  that  the 
legislative  power  of  society  rest  upon  universal  suffrage 
and  the  political  equality  of  all  men  and  women,  except 
lunatics  and  criminals.  It  is  manifestly  unjust  to  exact 
obedience  to  the  laws  from  those  who  have  had  no  share  in 
making  them  and  can  have  no  share  in  altering  them.  The 
only  exceptions  to  this  principle  are  (1)  minors,  children 
not  yet  arrived  at  the  age  of  responsibility  agreed  upon  by 
the  citizens;  (2)  lunatics  and  certain  classes  of  criminals; 
(3)  aliens,  non-citizens  temporarily  resident  in  the  state. 

POLITICAL  DEMOCRACY  A  PRIME  REQUISITE. 

Democracy  in  the  sense  of  popular  self-government,  the 
"government  of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the  peo- 
ple," of  which  political  rhetoricians  boast,  is  only  approxi- 
mately attainable.  While  all  can  equally  participate  in  the 
legislative  power,  all  cannot  participate  directly  in  the 
administrative  power,  and  it  becomes  necessary,  therefore, 
to  adopt  the  principle  of  delegated  authority,  representative 
government.     Direct   legislation   by   the  people   might  be 


50  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

realized  through  the  adoption  of  the  principles  of  popular 
initiative  and  referendum,  proportional  representation  and 
the  right  of  recall. 

Indeed,  there  is  no  apparent  reason  why  all  legislation, 
except  temporary  legislation  as  in  war  time,  famine, 
plague  and  such  abnormal  conditions,  should  not  be  directly 
initiated  and  enacted,  leaving  only  the  just  and  proper 
enforcement  of  the  law  to  delegated  authority.  In  all  the 
programs  of  Socialist  parties  throughout  the  world,  the 
principles  of  popular  initiative  and  referendum,  propor- 
tional representation  and  the  right  of  recalling  representa- 
tives are  included  at  the  present  time;  not  merely  as  means 
to  secure  a  greater  degree  of  real  democracy  within  the 
existing  social  system,  but  also,  and  primarily,  to  prepare  the 
required  political  framework  of  democracy  for  the  indus- 
trial commonwealth  of  the  future. 

The  great  political  problem  for  such  a  society  con- 
sists in  choosing  wisely  the  trustees  of  this  important  so- 
cial function  and  authority,  and  seeing  that  they  rightly 
use  it  for  the  common  good,  without  abuse,  either  for  the 
profit  of  themselves  or  their  friends,  and  without  prejudice 
to  any  portion  of  society.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  an 
"automatic  democracy,"  and  eternal  vigilance  will  be  the 
price  of  liberty  under  Socialism  as  it  has  ever  been.  There 
can  be  no  other  safeguard  against  the  usurpation  of  power 
than  the  popular  will  and  conscience  ever  alert  upon  the 
watch-towers. 

3. 

With  these  general  principles  prevised,  we  may  con- 
sider, briefly,  what  are  the  respective  rights  of  the  indi- 
vidual and  of  society.  The  rights  of  the  individual  may 
be  summarized  as  follows:  There  must  be  perfect  free- 
dom of  movement,  including  the  right  to  withdraw  from 
the  domain  of  the  government  to  migrate  at  will  to  other 
territories;  immunity  from  arrest,  except  for  infringing 
others'  rights,  with  compensation  for  improper  arrest; 
respect  of  the  privacy  of  domicile  and  correspondence; 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  51 

full  liberty  of  dress,  subject  to  decency;  freedom  of  utter- 
ance, whether  by  speech  or  publication,  subject  only  to 
the  protection  of  others  from  insult,  injury  or  interference 
with  their  equal  liberties.  Absolute  freedom  of  the  indi- 
vidual in  all  that  pertains  to  art,  science,  philosophy  and 
religion,  and  their  teaching  or  propaganda,  is  essential. 
The  state  can  rightly  have  nothing  to  do  with  these  mat- 
ters; they  belong  to  the  personal  life  alone.  Art,  science, 
philosophy  and  religion  cannot  be  protected  by  any  au- 
thority. .    .   . 

MARRIAGE  AND  THE  STATE. 

In  this  summary  only  certainties,  imperative,  essential 
conditions,  have  been  included.  Doubtless  many  Socialists 
would  considerably  extend  the  list  of  things  to  be  totally 
exempted  from  collective  authority  and  control.  Some,  for 
instance,  would  include  the  right  of  the  individual  to  pos- 
sess and  bear  arms  for  the  defense  of  person  and  prop- 
erty. On  the  other  hand,  it  might  be  objected  with  good 
show  of  reason  by  other  Socialists  that  such  a  right  must 
always  be  liable  to  abuses  imperiling  the  peace  of  society, 
and  that  the  same  ends  would  be  served  more  surely  if 
individual  armament  were  made  impossible. 

Other  Socialists  would  include  in  the  category  of  pri- 
vate acts  outside  the  sphere  of  law  the  union  of  the  sexes. 
They  would  do  away  with  legal  intervention  in  marriage 
and  make  it  exclusively  a  private  concern.  On  the  other 
hand,  again,  many  Socialists,  probably  an  overwhelming 
majority,  would  object.  They  would  insist  that  the  state 
must,  in  the  interest  of  the  children  and  for  its  own  self- 
preservation,  assume  certain  responsibilities  for,  and  exer- 
cise a  certain  control  over,  all  marriages.  While  believing 
that  under  Socialism  marriage  would  no  longer  be  subject 
to  economic  motives — matrimonial  markets  for  titles  and 
fortunes  no  longer  existing — and  that  the  maximum  of 
personal  freedom  together  with  the  minimum  of  social  au- 
thority would  be  possible  in  the  union  of  the  sexes,  they 
would  still  insist  upon  the  necessity  of  that  minimum  of 


52  Appeal  Socialist  Cl^issics 

legal  control.  While,  therefore,  our  hasty  summary  by  no 
means  exhausts  the  category  of  personal  liberties,  it  is  suf- 
ficiently comprehensive  to  show  that  individual  freedom 
would  by  no  means  be  crushed  out  of  existence  by  the  So- 
cialist state.  The  intolerable  bureaucracy  of  collectivism  is 
wholly  an  imaginary  evil. 

THE  STATE'S  FUNCTION  PRIMARILY  ECONOMIC. 

In  the  same  general  manner,  we  may  summarize  the 
principal  functions  of  the  state*  as  follows:  the  state  has 
the  right  and  the  power  to  organize  and  control  the  eco- 
nomic system,  comprehending  in  that  term  the  production    < 
and  distribution  of  all  social  wealth  wherever  private  enter-  /\ 
prise  is  dangerous  to  the  social  well-being,  or  is  inefficient; 
the  defense  of  the  community   from   invasion,   from  fire, 
flood,  famine  or  disease;  the  relations  with  other  states, 
such  as  trade  agreements,  boundary  treaties,  and  the  like; 
the  maintenance  of  order,  including  the  juridical  and  police  ^^, 
systems  in  all  their  branches ;  and  public  education  in  all  S 
its  departments.     It  will  be  found  that  these  five  groups 
of  functions  include  all  the  services  which  the  state  may 
properly  undertake,  and  that  not  one  of  them  can  be  safely 
intrusted  to  private  enterprise. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  necessary  to  assume  that 
the  state  must  have  an  absolute  monopoly  of  any  one  of 
these  groups  of  functions  to  be  performed  in  the  social  or- 
ganism. It  would  not  be  necessary,  for  example,  for  the 
state  to  prohibit  its  citizens  from  entering  into  voluntary 
relations  with  the  citizens  of  other  countries  for  the  pro- 
motion of  friendly  international  relations,  for  trade  reci- 
procity and  so  on.  Likewise  the  juridical  functions  being 
in  the  hands  of  the  state  would  not  prevent  voluntary  arbi- 
tration. Our  study  becomes,  therefore,  a  study  of  social 
physiology. 


*I  use  the  word  "state"  throughout  in  its  largest,  most  cora- 
prehenaive  sense  as  meaning  the  whole  political  organisation  of 
society. 


Th£  Elements  of  Socialism  53 

CONTINUANCE  OF  PRIVATE  INDUSTRY. 

The  principle  already  postulated,  that  the  state  must 
undertake  the  production  and  distribution  of  social  wealth 
wherever  private  enterprise  is  dangerous,  or  less  efficient 
than  public  enterprise,  clarifies  somewhat  the  problem  of 
the  industrial  organization  of  the  Socialist  regime,  which 
is  a  vastly  more  difficult  problem  than  that  of  its  political 
organization.  Socialism  by  no  means  involves  the  suppres- 
sion of  all  private  property  and  industry;  only  when  these 
'^fail  in  efficiency  or  result  in  injustice  and  inequality  of  ben- 
efits does  socialization  present  itself.  There  are  many 
petty,  subordinate  industries,  especially  the  making  of 
articles  of  luxury,  which  might  be  allowed  to  remain  in 
private  hands,  subject  only  to  such  general  regulation  as 
might  be  found  necessary  for  the  protection  of  health  and 
the  public  order.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  things,  nat- 
ural monopolies,  which  cannot  be  justly  or  efficiently  used 
by  private  enterprise.  Land  ownership  and  all  that  depends 
thereon,  such  as  mining,  transportation  and  the  like,  must 
of  necessity  be  collective  and  universal.* 

In  the  Socialist  state,  then,  certain  forms  of  private 
industry  will  be  tolerated,  and  perhaps  even  definitely 
encouraged,  but  the  great  fundamental  economic  activities 
will  be  socialized.  The  Socialist  state  will  not  be  static, 
and  consequently  what  at  first  may  be  regarded  as  being 
properly  the  subject  of  private  enterprise  may  develop  to 
an  extent  or  in  directions  which  necessitate  its  transforma- 
tion to  the  category  of  essentially  social  properties.  Hence, 
when  the  Socialist  state  is  here  spoken  of,  it  is  not  by  any 
means  intended  to  describe  the  full  limits  of  socialization, 
the  fully  developed  collectivist  commonwealth,  but  rather 
the  opposite  limits,  the  minimum  of  socialization;  the  con- 
ditions essential  to  that  stage  of  social  evolution  at  which 
it  will  be  possible  to  speak  of  capitalism  as  a  past  and  out- 


*0f  course,  this  does  not  mean  that  there  must  not  be  priyate 
aSE  of  land. 


54  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

grown  stage,  and  of  the  present  as  the  new  era  of  So- 
cialism. 

THE    SCOPE    OF    STATE    OWNERSHIP. 

Socialists,  naturally,  differ  upon  this  point  very  ma- 
terially. To  the  present  writer,  however,  it  would  seem 
sufficiently  comprehensive  to  say  that  the  economic  struc- 
ture of  the  new  society  must  include  at  least  the  following : 
(1)  Ownership  of  all  natural  resources,  such  as  land, 
mines,  forests,  oil  wells  and  so  on ;  (2)  operation  of  all  the 
means  of  transportation  and  communication  other  than 
those  of  purely  personal  service;  (3)  operation  of  all  in- 
dustrial production  involving  large  capital  and  associated 
labor,  except  where  carried  on  by  voluntary,  democratic 
co-operation;  (4)  organization  of  all  labor  essential  to  the 
public  service,  such  as  the  building  of  schools,  hospitals, 
docks,  roads,  bridges,  sewers  and  the  like;  the  construction 
of  all  the  machinery  and  plant  requisite  to  the  social  pro- 
duction and  distribution,  and  of  things  necessary  for  the 
maintenance  of  those  engaged  in  such  public  services  as 
the  national  defense  and  all  who  are  wards  of  the  state; 
(5)  a  monopoly  of  the  monetary  and  credit  functions,  in- 
cluding coinage,  banking,  mortgaging  and  the  extension  of 
credit  to  private  enterprise. 

With  these  economic  activities  undertaken  by  the  state, 
a  pure  democracy  differing  vitally  from  all  the  class-dom- 
inated states  of  history,  private  enterprise  would  by  no 
means  be  excluded,  but  limited  to  an  extent  making  the 
exploitation  of  public  interests  and  needs  for  private  gain 
impossible.  Socialism  thus  becomes  the  defender  of  indi- 
vidual liberty,  not  its  enemy. 

4. 

As  the  owner  of  the  earth  and  all  the  major  instru- 
ments of  production  and  exchange,  society  would  occupy  a 
position  enabling  it  to  see  that  the  physical  and  mental 
benefits  derived  from  its  wealth,  its  natural  resources,  its 
collective  experience,  genius  and  labor,  were  universalized 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  55 

as  befits  a  democracy.  It  would  be  able  to  guarantee  the 
right  to  live  by  labor  to  all  its  citizens  through  preventing 
the  monopolization  of  the  land  and  instruments  and  social 
opportunities  in  general.  It  would  be  in  a  position  to  make 
every  development  from  competition  to  monopoly  the  occa- 
sion for  further  socialization. 

Thus  there  would  be  no  danger  to  the  state  in  per- 
mitting, or  even  fostering,  private  industry  within  the  lim- 
its suggested.  As  the  organizer  of  the  vast  body  of  labor 
essential  to  the  operation  of  the  main  productive  and  dis- 
tributive functions  of  society,  and  to  the  other  public  serv- 
ices, the  state  would  be  able  to  set  the  standard  of  living, 
alike  with  regard  to  income  and  leisure,  which  private  in- 
dustry would  be  compelled,  by  competitive  force,  to  observe. 
The  regulation  of  production,  too,  would  be  possible,  and  as 
a  result  the  crises  arising  from  glutted  markets  would  dis- 
appear. Finally,  in  the  control  of  all  the  functions  of 
credit,  the  state  would  effectually  prevent  the  exploitation 
of  the  mass  of  the  people  through  financial  agencies,  which 
is  perhaps  the  greatest  evil  of  our  present  social  system. 

The  application  of  the  principles  of  democracy  to  the 
organization  and  administration  of  these  great  economic 
services  of  production,  exchange  and  credit  is  a  probleni 
full  of  alluring  possibilities  of  speculation.  "This  that  they 
call  the  Organization  of  Labor,"  said  Carlyle,  "is  the  Uni- 
versal Vital  Problem  of  the  World."  It  is  the  great  central 
problem  of  the  socialization  of  industry  and  the  state,  be- 
fore which  all  other  problems  pale  into  insignificance.  It 
is  comparatively  easy  to  picture  an  ideal  political  democ- 
racy ;  and  the  main  structural  economic  organization  of  the 
Socialist  regime,  with  its  private  and  public  functions  more 
or  less  clearly  defined,  is  not  very  difficult  of  conception. 
These  are  foreshadowed  with  varying  degrees  of  distinct- 
ness in  present  society,  and  the  light  of  experience  illumines 
the  pathway  before  us.  It  is  when  we  come  to  the  ques- 
tion of  the  spirit  of  the  economic  organization  of  the  fu- 
ture, the  methods  of  direction  and  management,  that  the 


56  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

light  fails  and  we  must  grope  our  way  into  the  great  un- 
known with  imagination  and  our  sense  of  justice  for 
guides. 

BUREAUCRATIC  CONTROL  OF  PRESENT  STATE  ENTERPRISES. 

Most  Socialist  writers  who  have  attempted  to  deal 
with  this  subject  have  simply  regarded  the  state  as  the 
greatest  employer  of  labor,  carrying  on  its  business  upon 
methods  not  materially  different  from  those  adopted  by  the 
great  industrial  corporations  of  today.  Boards  of  experts, 
chosen  by  civil  service  methods,  directing  all  the  economic 
activities  of  the  state,  such  is  their  general  conception  of 
the  industrial  democracy  of  the  Socialist  regime.  They 
believe,  in  other  words,  that  the  methods  now  employed  by 
the  capitalist  state,  and  by  individuals  within  the  capitalist 
state,  would  simply  be  extended  under  the  Socialist  regime. 
If  this  be  so,  a  psychological  anomaly  appears  in  the  prac- 
tical abandonment  of  the  claim  that,  as  a  result  of  the  class 
conflict  in  society,  the  public  ownership  evolved  within  the 
capitalist  state  is  essentially  inferior  to  the  public  owner- 
ship of  the  Socialist  ideal.  It  is  perfectly  clear  that  if  the 
industrial  organization  under  Socialism  is  to  be  such  that 
the  workers  employed  in  any  industry  have  no  more  voice 
in  its  management  than  the  postal  employes  in  this  country 
have  at  the  present  time,  it  cannot  be  otherwise  than  absurd 
to  speak  of  it  as  an  industrial  democracy. 

Here,  in  truth,  lies  the  crux  of  the  greatest  problem^ 
of  all.  We  must  face  the  fact  that,  in  anything  worthy  of 
the  name  of  an  industrial  democracy,  the  terms  and  condi- 
tions of  employment  cannot  be  decided  wholly  without  re- 
gard to  the  will  of  the  workers  themselves  on  the  one  hand, 
nor,  on  the  other  hand,  by  the  workers  alone  without  refer- 
ence to  the  general  body  of  the  citizenry.  If  the  former 
method  fails  to  satisfy  the  requirements  of  democracy  by 
ignoring  the  will  of  the  workers  in  the  organization  of  in- 
dustry, the  alternative  method  involves  a  hierarchical  gov- 
ernment, equally  incompatible  with  democracy.    Some  way 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  57 

must  be  found  by  which  the  industrial  government  of  so- 
ciety, the  organization  of  production  and  distribution,  may 
be  securely  based  upon  the  dual  basis  of  common  civic 
rights  and  the  rights  of  the  workers  in  their  special  rela- 
tions as  such. 

PARTICIPATION  OF  THE  WORKERS  IN  ADMINISTRATION. 

In  the  actual  practice  today,  in  those  industries  in 
which  the  organization  of  the  workers  into  unions  has  been 
most  successful,  the  workers,  through  their  organizations, 
do  exercise  a  certain  amount  of  control  over  the  conditions 
of  their  employment.  They  make  trade  agreements,  for 
instance,  in  which  such  matters  as  wages,  hours  of  labor, 
apprenticeship,  output,  engagement  and  discharge  of  work- 
ers and  numerous  other  matters  of  a  like  nature,  are  made 
subject  to  the  joint  control  of  the  employers  and  the  work- 
ers. Of  course,  this  share  in  the  control  of  the  industry  in 
which  they  are  employed  is  a  right  enjoyed  only  as  the 
fruit  of  conquest,  won  by  war  and  maintained  only  by 
ceaseless  vigilance  and  armed  strength.  It  is  not  incon- 
ceivable, however,  that  in  the  Socialist  state  there  might  be 
a  frank  extension  of  this  principle.  The  workers  in  the 
main  groups  of  industries  might  form  autonomous  organ- 
izations for  the  administration  of  their  special  interests, 
subject  only  to  certain  fundamental  laws  of  society  and  its 
government.  Thus,  the  trades  unions  would  become  admin- 
istrative politico-economic  organizations,  after  the  manner 
of  the  mediaeval  guilds,  instead  of  mere  agencies  of  class 
warfare  as  at  present. 

The  economic  organization  of  the  Socialist  state  would 
consist,  then,  of  three  distinct  forms,  as  follows:  (1)  Pri- 
vate production  and  exchange,  subject  only  to  such  general 
supervision  and  control  by  the  state  as  the  interests  of  so- 
ciety demand,  such  as  protection  against  monopolization, 
sanitary  laws,  and  the  like:  (2)  voluntary  co-operation, 
subject  to  similar  supervision  and  control;  (3)  production 
and  exchange  by  the  state,  the  administration  to  be  by  the 


58  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

autonomous  organizations  of  the  workers  in  industrial 
groups,  subject  to  the  fundamental  laws  and  government  of 
society  as  a  whole. 

5. 
Two  other  functions  of  the  economic  organization  of 
society  remain  to  be  considered,  the  distribution  of  labor 
and  its  remuneration.  In  the  organization  of  industry  so- 
ciety will  have  to  achieve  a  twofold  result,  a  maximum  of 
general,  social  efficiency,  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  personal 
liberty  and  comfort  to  the  workers  on  the  other.  The  state 
would  not  only  guarantee  the  right  to  labor,  but,  as  a  corol- 
lary, it  would  impose  the  duty  of  labor  upon  every  com- 
petent person.  The  Pauline  injunction,  "If  any  man  will 
not  work,  neither  shall  he  eat,"  would  be  applied  in  the  So- 
cialist state  to  all  except  the  incompetent  to  labor.  The 
immature  child,  the  aged,  the  sick  and  infirm  members  of 
society,  would  alone  be  exempted  from  labor.  The  result 
of  this  would  be  that  instead  of  a  large  unemployed  army, 
vainly  seeking  the  right  to  work,  on  the  one  hand,  accom- 
panied by  the  excessive  overwork  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
workers  fortunate  enough  to  be  employed,  a  vast  increase 
in  the  number  of  producers  from  this  one  cause  alone 
would  make  possible  much  greater  leisure  for  the  whole 
body  of  workers.  Benjamin  Franklin  estimated  that  in  his 
day  four  hours'  labor  from  every  adult  male  able  to  work 
would  be  more  than  sufficient  to  provide  wealth  enough  for 
all  human  wants;  and  it  is  certain  that,  without  resorting 
to  any  standards  of  Spartan  simplicity,  or  denying  luxury 
and  beauty  to  any  individual,  Franklin's  estimate  could  be 
easily  realized  with  anything  approaching  a  scientific  or- 
ganization of  labor. 

ELIMINATION   OF  USELESS   OCCUPATIONS. 

Not  only  would  the  productive  forces  be  enormously 
increased  by  the  absorption  of  those  workers  who  under  the 
present  system  are  unemployed,  and  those  who  do  not  labor 
or  seek  labor;  in  addition  to  these,  there  would  be  a  tre- 


Tke  Elements  of  Socialism  i9 

mendous  transference  of  potential  productive  energy  from 
occupations  rendered  obsolete  and  unnecessary  by  the  so- 
cialization of  society.  Thus,  there  are  today  tens  of  thou- 
sands of  lawyers,  bankers,  traders,  middlemen,  speculators 
and  others,  whose  functions  necessary  to  the  capitalist  sys- 
tem, would,  in  most  cases,  cease  to  have  any  value.  They 
would  be  compelled  because  of  this  to  enter  the  producing 
class.  The  possibilities  of  the  scientific  organization  of  in- 
dustry are  almost  unlimited.  Every  gain  made  by  the  state 
in  the  direction  of  economy  of  production  would  test  the 
private  enterprise  existing  and  urge  it  on  in  the  same  di- 
rection. Likewise,  every  gain  made  by  the  private  pro- 
ducers would  test  the  social  production  and  urge  it  onward. 
Whether  socialized  production  extended  its  sphere,  or  re- 
mained confined  to  its  minimum  limitations,  would  depend 
upon  the  comparative  success  or  failure  resulting.  The 
state  would  not  be  able  to  arbitrarily  extend  its  functions. 
The  decision  would  rest  with  the  people,  who  would,  nat- 
urally, resort  to  social  effort  wherever  it  demonstrated  its 
ability  to  perform  any  function  more  efficiently  than  pri- 
vate enterprise,  with  greater  advantages  of  comfort  and 
liberty  to  the  community  and  to  the  individual. 

FREE  CHOICE  OF  PURSUITS. 

While  in  the  Socialist  regime  labor  would  be  compul- 
sory, it  is  inconceivable  that  a  free  people  would  tolerate  a 
bureaucratic  rule  assigning  to  each  individual  his  or  her 
proper  task,  no  matter  how  ingenious  the  system  of  as- 
signment might  be.  Just  as  it  is  necessary  to  insist  that 
all  must  be  secured  in  their  right  to  labor,  and  required 
to  labor,  it  is  necessary  also  that  the  choice  of  one's  occu- 
pation should  be  as  far  as  possible  personal  and  free,  sub- 
ject only  to  the  laws  of  supply  and  demand.  The  greatest 
amount  of  personal  freedom  compatible  with  the  requisite 
efficiency  would  be  secured  to  the  workers  in  their  chosen 
occupations  through  their  craft  organizations. 

But,  it  will  be  objected,  all  occupations  are  not  equally 


60  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

desirable.  There  are  certain  forms  of  work  which,  dis- 
agreeable in  themselves,  are  just  as  essential  to  the  well- 
being  of  society  as  the  most  artistic  and  pleasing.  Who 
will  do  the  dirty  work,  the  hard  work,  the  dangerous  work, 
under  Socialism?  Will  these  occupations  also  be  left  to 
choice,  and,  if  so,  will  there  not  be  an  insurmountable  dif- 
ficulty arising  from  the  natural  reluctance  of  men  to  choose 
such  work? 

6. 

In  affirming  the  principle  of  free  choice  the  Socialist 
is  called  upon  to  show  that  the  absence  of  compulsion 
would  not  involve  the  neglect  of  these  disagreeable,  but 
highly  important,  social  services;  that  it  would  be  com- 
patible with  social  safety  to  leave  them  to  personal  choice. 
In  the  first  place,  much  of  this  kind  of  work  that  is  now 
performed  by  human  labor  could  be  more  efficiently  done 
by  mechanical  means.  Much  of  the  work  done  by  sweated 
women  and  children  in  our  cities  is  in  fact  done  in  competi- 
tion with  machines.  Machinery  has  been  invented,  and  is 
now  available,  to  do  thousands  of  the  disagreeable  and 
hurtful  things  now  being  done  by  human  beings.  Profes- 
sor Franklin  H.  Giddings  is  perfectly  right  when  he  says: 
"Modern  civilization  does  not  require,  it  does  not  need,  the 
drudgery  of  needlewomen  or  the  crushing  toil  of  men  in  a 
score  of  life-destroying  occupations.  If  these  wretched 
beings  should  drop  out  of  existence  and  no  others  take  their 
places,  the  economic  activities  of  the  world  would  not 
greatly  suffer.  A  thousand  devices  latent  in  inventive 
brains  would  quickly  make  good  any  momentary  loss."* 

When,  in  England,  a  law  was  passed  forbidding  the 
practice  of  forcing  little  boys  through  chimneys,  to  clean 
them,  chimneys  did  not  cease  to  be  swept.  Other,  less  dis- 
agreeable and  less  dangerous,  means  were  quickly  invented. 
When  the  woolen  manufacturers  were  prevented  from  em- 
ploying little  boys  and  girls,  they  invented  the  piecing  ma- 


*"Ethics    of    Social    Progress,"   by    Professor   Franklin    H.    Gid- 
dings in  "Philanthropy  and  Social  Progress"   (1893),  p.  226. 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  61 

chine, ^  Thousands  of  instances  might  be  compiled  to  sup- 
port the  contention  of  Professor  Giddings,  equally  as  perti- 
nent as  these.  Another  important  point  is  that  the  amount 
of  work  to  be  done  would  be  very  much  less  than  now.  That 
would  certainly  result  from  the  scientific  organization  of 
industry.  I  suspect  that,  if  the  subject  could  be  properly 
investigated,  it  could  be  shown  that  the  amount  of  such 
labor  involved  in  wasteful  and  unnecessary  advertising  alone 
is  enormous. 

MAKING    DISAGREEABLE   TASKS   ATTRACTIYE. 

Still,  with  all  possible  reduction  of  the  quantity  of 
such  work  to  be  done,  and  with  all  the  mechanical  genius 
possible,  it  may  be  freely  conceded  that  there  would  be  some 
work  quite  dangerous,  altogether  disagreeable  and  repellent, 
and  a  great  difference  in  the  degree  of  attractiveness  in 
some  occupations  as  compared  with  others.  But  an  occupa- 
tion repellent  in  itself  might  be  made  attractive,  if  the 
hours  of  labor  were  relatively  few  as  compared  with  other 
occupations.  If  six  hours  be  regarded  as  the  normal  work- 
ing day,  it  is  quite  easy  to  believe  that,  for  sake  of  the 
larger  leisure,  with  its  opportunities  for  the  pursuit  of  spe- 
cial interests,  many  a  man  would  gladly  accept  a  disagree- 
able position  for  three  hours  a  day. 

The  same  holds  true  of  superior  remuneration.  Under 
the  Socialist  regime,  just  as  today,  many  a  man  would  gladly 
exchange  his  work  for  less  pleasant  work,  if  the  remunera- 
tion offered  were  higher.  To  the  old  Utopian  ideas  of  abso- 
lute equality  and  uniformity  these  methods  would  be  fatal, 
but  they  are  not  at  all  incompatible  with  modern,  scientific 
Socialism.  Finally,  we  must  not  forget  that  there  is  a  nat- 
ural inequality  of  talent,  of  power.  In  any  state  of  society 
most  men  will  prefer  to  do  the  things  they  are  best  fitted 
for,  the  things  they  can  do  easiest  and  best.  And  the  man 
who  feels  himself  best  fitted  to  be  a  hewer  of  wood  or  drawer 


*"The  Economics  of  Factory  Legrislation,"  in  "The  Case  for  the 
Factory  Acts,"  edited  by  Mrs.  Sidney  Webb,  p.  50. 


62  Appeal  Socialist  Classies 

of  water  will  choose  that  rather  than  some  loftier  task. 
There  is  no  reason  at  all  to  suppose  that  leaving  the  choice 
of  occupation  to  the  individual  would  involve  the  slightest 
risk  to  society. 

That  equality  of  remuneration  is  not  an  essential  condi- 
tion of  the  Socialist  regime,  we  have  already  seen.  It  may 
be  freely  admitted,  however,  that  the  ideal  to  be  aimed  at, 
ultimately,  must  be  approximate  equality  of  income.  Other- 
wise, class  formations  must  take  place  and  the  old  problems 
incidental  to  economic  inequality  reappear.  With  such  an 
industrial  democracy  as  I  have  suggested  as  being  essential 
to  the  Socialist  state,  there  is  little  doubt  that  this  result 
would  be  gradually  attained.  Let  us  consider  briefly  now 
the  method  of  the  remuneration  of  labor. 

THE  MATTER  OF  WAGES. 

Socialists  are  too  often  judged  by  their  shibboleths 
rather  than  by  the  principles  which  those  shibboleths  imper- 
fectly express,  or  seek  to  express.  Declaiming,  rightly, 
against  the  wages  system  as  a  form  of  slave  labor,  the 
"abolition  of  wage  slavery"  forever  inscribed  on  their  ban- 
ners, the  average  man  is  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Socialists  are  working  for  a  system  in  which  the  workers 
will  divide  their  actual  products  and  then  barter  the  surplus 
for  the  surplus  products  of  other  workers.  Either  that,  or 
the  most  rigid  system  of  governmental  production  and  a 
method  of  distributing  rations  and  uniforms  similar  to  that 
which  obtains  in  the  military  organization  of  present-day 
governments.  It  is  easily  seen,  however,  that  such  plans 
do  not,  on  the  one  hand,  conform  to  the  democratic  ideal  of 
the  Socialists,  nor  would  either  of  them,  on  the  other  hand, 
be  compatible  with  the  wide  personal  liberty  herein  put  for- 
ward as  characteristic  of  the  Socialist  state. 

The  earlier  Utopian  Socialists  did  propose  to  do  away 
with  wages;  in  fact,  they  proposed  to  abolish  money  alto- 
gether, and  invented  various  forms  of  "labor  notes"  as  a 
means  of  giving  equality  of  remuneration  for  given  quan- 


The  Elements  of  Socialism  63 

tities  of  labor,  and  providing  a  medium  for  the  exchange  of 
wealth.  But  when  the  Socialists  of  today  speak  of  the 
"abolition  of  wages,"  or  of  the  wages  system,  they  use  the 
words  in  the  same  sense  as  they  speak  of  the  abolition  of 
capital;  they  would  abolish  only  the  social  relations  implied 
in  the  terms.  Just  as  they  do  not  mean  by  the  abolition  of 
capital  the  destruction  of  the  machinery  and  implements  of 
production,  but  the  social  relation  in  which  they  are  used  to 
create  profit  for  the  few;  so,  when  they  speak  of  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  wages  system,  they  mean  only  the  use  of  wages 
to  exploit  the  producers  for  the  gain  of  the  owners  of  the 
means  of  production  and  exchange. 

DIVIDENDS  FOR  LABOR  AND  SERVICE. 

Though  the  name  "wages"  might  not  be  changed,  a 
money  payment  for  labor  in  a  democratic  arrangement  of 
industry,  representing  an  approximation  to  the  full  value  of 
the  labor,  minus  only  its  share  of  the  cost  of  maintaining 
the  social  services,  and  the  weaker,  dependent  members  of 
society,  is  vastly  different  from  a  money  payment  for  labor 
by  one  individual  to  other  individuals,  representing  an  ap- 
proximation to  their  cost  of  living,  bearing  no  relation  to 
the  value  of  the  labor  products,  and  paid  in  lieu  of  those 
products  with  a  view  to  the  gathering  of  a  rich  surplus  by 
the  payer. 

Karl  Kautsky,  perhaps  the  greatest  living  exponent  of 
the  theories  of  modern  Socialism,  has  made  this  point  per- 
fectly clear.  He  accepts  without  reserve  the  belief  that 
wages,  unequal  and  paid  in  money,  will  be  the  method  of 
remuneration  for  labor  in  the  Socialist  regime.  When  too 
many  laborers  rush  into  certain  branches  of  industry,  the 
natural  way  to  lessen  their  number  and  to  increase  the  num- 
ber of  laborers  in  other  branches  where  there  is  need  for 
them,  will  be  to  reduce  wages  in  the  one  and  to  increase 
them  in  the  other.  Socialism,  instead  of  being  defined  as  an 
attempt  to  make  men  equal,  might  perhaps  be  more  justly 
and  accurately  defined  as  a  social  system  based  upon  the  nat- 


64  Appeal  Socialist  Classics 

ural  inequalities  of  mankind.  Not  human  equality,  but 
equality  of  opportunity  to  prevent  the  creation  of  artificial 
inequalities  by  privilege,  is  the  essence  of  Socialism. 


CONCLUSION. 

In  this  brief  suggested  outline  of  the  Socialist  state, 
the  aim  has  been  to  show  that  the  Socialist  ideal  is  far  from 
being  the  network  of  laws  commonly  imagined,  or  the  me- 
chanical arrangement  of  human  relations  devised  by  Utopian 
romancers.  If  the  Socialist  propaganda  of  today  largely 
consists  of  the  advocacy  of  laws,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  these  are  to  ameliorate  conditions  in  the  existing  social 
system.  The  Socialist  ideal  of  the  state  of  the  future  is  not 
a  life  completely  enmeshed  in  a  network  of  government,  but 
a  life  controlled  by  government  as  little  as  possible — a  maxi- 
mum of  personal  freedom  with  a  minimum  of  restraint. 

These  things  shall  be!     A  loftier  race 
Than  e'er  the  world  hath  known  shall  rise, 

With  flower  of  freedom  in  their  souls, 
And  light  of  science  in  their  eyes.  * 


•"Socialism"  (1906),  pp.  211-239.    The  concluding  lines  are  from 
a  poem  entitled  "A  Vista,"  by  John  Addington  Symonda. 


BOOKS 

Mentioned  in  This  Pamphlet 

For  Sale  by  the  Appeal  Book  Department 

Socialism  Summed  Up.     By  Morris  Hillqait.     New  York:    The 

Metropolitan  Magazine  Company.     Pages,  110.     Paper,  25 

cents. 
Marxian  Economics.  By  Ernest  Untermann.    Chicago:    Charles 

H.  Kerr  &  Co.   Pages,  252.    Cloth,  $1. 
The  Struggle  for  Existence.    By  Walter  Thomas  Mills.   Berke- 
ley, Cal.:     The  International  School  of  Social  Economy. 

Pages,  635.     Paper,  50  cents.     (Special  edition.) 
Capitalist  and  Laborer.    By  John  Spargo.     Chicago:     Charles 

II.  Kerr  &  Co.  Pages,  122.    Cloth,  50  cents.    (Out  of  print.) 
The    Coriimunist    Manifesto.      By    Karl    Marx    and    Friedrich 

Engels.     New  York:     Socialist  Literature  Co.     Pages,  46. 

Paper,  10  cents. 
Mass  and  Class.    By  W.  J.  Ghent.    New  York:     The  Macmil- 

lan  Company.     Pages,  256.     Cloth,  $1.25. 
Introduction  to  Socialism.    By  Noble  A.  Richardson.    Chicago: 

Charles  H.  Kerr  &  Co,     Pages,  64.    Paper,  5  cents. 
Socialism.      By    John    Spargo.     New    York:      The    Macmillan 

Company.    Pages  (Jtf06  edition),  250.    Cloth,  $1.25.    (There 

is  also  a  revised  and  enlarged  edition  published  in  1910.) 
The  Truth  About  Socialism.    By  Allan  L.  Benson.    New  York: 

B.  W.  Huebsch.    Pages,  188.    Paper,  25  cents. 
Socialism:     Promise  or  Menace?    By  Morris  Hillquit  and  John 

A.  Ryan.     New  York:     The  Macmillan  "Company.     Pages, 

265.     Cloth,  $1.50. 
The  Theoretical  System  of  Karl  Marx.     By  Louis  B.  Boudin. 

Chicago:     Charles  H.  Kerr  &  Co.    Pages,  277.     Cloth,  $1. 
Socialism    for-  Students.     By    Jceeph    E.    Cohen.     Chicago: 

Charles  H.  Kerr  &  Co.    Pages,  153.    Cloth,  50  cents. 
Principles  of  Scientific  Socialism.     By  Charles  H.  Vail.     Chi- 
cago:    Charles  H.  Kerr  &  Co.    Pages,  232.    Cloth,  $1, 
Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice.     By  Morris  Hillquit.    New 

York:    The  Macmillan  Company.    Pages,  356.    Cloth,  $1.50. 

Appeal  Book  Department 

GIRARD,  KANSAS 


i 


